1 AO866OF2010.sxw vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.866 OF 2010. IN SUIT NO.765 of 2010 Moru Lumbharam Choudhary .. Appellant -versus The Chief Officer, M B.R. & R Board, MHADA and others .. Respondent. Mr. A.N. Nasikwala for Appellant Mr. G. W. Mathos for respondent Nos l & 2. CORAM: R. C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 9th AUGUST, 2010 P.C. 1. In this appeal, the grievance made by the appellant is that the learned Trial Judge failed to take into consideration the fact that no notice u/s 89 of MHADA Act, was served upon the appellant; before MHADA started to demolish building relocating the occupants thereof. The learned Trial Judge has observed in para 6 that because of the allegations and counter allegations, it was not possible to comply with the directions as regards notice by MHADA smoothly. Therefore, directions were given to the MHADA to produce the show cause notice in the Court and MHADA was asked to consider the reply of the plaintiff filed in the Court. Accordingly on 11.6.2010, notice was served on the plaintiff in the Court. 2 AO866OF2010.sxw Plaintiff’s reply was considered and MHADA passed order dated 29.6.2010. Since the that plaintiff’s case has been considered and considering the fact that the building was to be taken up for structural repairs, because it was dilapidated and in a dangerous condition, the learned Judge rightly refused the injunction claimed by the applicant and also refused to extend the order directing parties to maintain status quo. The appeal, is therefore dismissed. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)