1 63 fa 1357.10.doc k IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1357 OF 2010 Smt.Ratnabai Shivaji Chauhan ..Appellant. Vs. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai ..Respondent. Mr. B.P.Shukla for the appellant. Mr. J.J.Xevier for respondent/BMC. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 19/10/2010. PC: 1 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2 Learned counsel for the Appellant does not press this Appeal and seeks liberty to the Appellant to apply to the concerned authority (Assistant Commissioner, M/East Ward) for alternate accommodation in lieu of the suit premises. He submits that the Appellant is entitled for alternate accommodation as per the Government Scheme as reflected in Circular dated 25th February, 2004. Mr. Xevier, learned counsel for the Corporation on the other hand submits that the Appellant is not entitled for alternate accommodation, however, in all 2 63 fa 1357.10.doc fairness he submits that if the Appellant makes any application for seeking alternate accommodation same may be directed to be considered by the concerned authority (Assistant Commissioner, M/East Ward) in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the Appellant seeks protection of his structure till 30th November, 2010. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I dispose of this Appeal by the following order: (a) Appeal is disposed of as not pressed and as a consequence thereof the impugned judgment and order passed by the City Civil Court dated 15.03.2010 stands confirmed. (b) It is open to the Appellant to apply to the concerned authority (Assistant Commissioner, M/East Ward) for seeking alternate accommodation. If the Appellant makes such an application same may be considered by the concerned authority (Assistant Commissioner, M/East Ward) as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of such representation/application made by the Appellant. It is made clear that while making this observation, this court has not examined the right or entitlement of the Appellant to get alternate accommodation. The concerned authority (Assistant Commissioner, M/East Ward) shall decide his representation on merits and uninfluenced by this order. 3 63 fa 1357.10.doc (c) The suit structure shall not be demolished or removed till 30th November, 2010. However, it is made clear that this protection has no connection with the representation/application that Appellant proposes to make for alternate accommodation. With these observations the Appeal is disposed of. (D.B.Bhosale, J.)