1 ao416-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION rpa APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.416 OF 2011 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 588 OF 2011 Anjali Apartment (Khar) Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. .. Appellant V/s. Mumbai Municipal Corporation and Anr. .. Respondents ..... Mr. Sharan Jagitani with Mr. Vijay Dhingreja and Mr. Yogendra M. Kanchan for the appellant. Mrs. K. K. Soraan for respondent No.1 – BMC. Mr. S. P. Pandey for respondent No.2. ..... CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATE : APRIL 15, 2011. P.C.:- Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent. 2. The challenge in this Appeal is to the order passed by the trial Court by which prayer for grant of ad-interim relief on Notice of Motion taken out by the appellant-plaintiff has been rejected. The 2 ao416-11 learned counsel appearing for the second respondent states that the second respondent is already using the flat in question as an office. On instructions he states that the second respondent will not carry on any work of renovation till the disposal of the Notice of Motion. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant seeks ad- interim relief directing the second respondent from discontinuing the present user. Such a drastic ad-interim relief cannot be granted at this stage. The statements made by the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent are accepted. The statement sufficiently protects the appellant. 4. Hence, no interference is called for with the discretionary order declining to grant ad-interim relief. 5. Appeal is accordingly dismissed. 6. Hearing of the Notion of Motion is expedited. 7. It is made clear that the Notice of Motion will be decided on its 3 ao416-11 own merits without being influenced by the impugned order and confirmation thereof by this Court. 8. Civil Application No.588 of 2011 does not survive and the same is disposed of. JUDGE