:: 1 :: rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 339 OF 2008 APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 339 OF 2008 APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 339 OF 2008 IN IN IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 447 OF 2007 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 447 OF 2007 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 447 OF 2007 IN IN IN L.C.SUIT NO.837 OF 2000 L.C.SUIT NO.837 OF 2000 L.C.SUIT NO.837 OF 2000 ....................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda . of Coram, appearances, Court’s . Orders or directions and . Registrar’s Order Court’s or Judge’s Order ....................................................... Mr. R.A.Yadav for the Appellant. Mrs.G.P.Mulekar, AGP for Respondent Nos. 2 and 4. Mr.D.V.Sutar i/b.Mr.Sachin B.Thorat for Respondent No.3. CORAM : S.J.VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J.VAZIFDAR, J. CORAM : S.J.VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 10TH OCTOBER, 2008. DATE : 10TH OCTOBER, 2008. DATE : 10TH OCTOBER, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- . Heard both the sides. 2. I have considered the :: 2 :: application for restoration on the ground that the Appellant ought not to suffer on account of the alleged negligence of the Advocate. However, it is common ground that the suit premises have already been demolished by M.H.A.D.A. on 20th November, 2004. The suit for an injunction restraining them from demolishing the premises is therefore infructuous. 3. It is however, clarified that the impugned order will not prevent the Appellant from adopting proceedings in accordance with law for enforcing any rights that the Appellant may have. 4. The Appeal from order is, accordingly, disposed of. (S.J.VAZIFAR, J.) (S.J.VAZIFAR, J.) (S.J.VAZIFAR, J.)