1 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1160 OF 2009 ALONG WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1441 OF 2009 Mohamed Arif Haji Motiwala ... Appellant v/s Municipal Corpn. Of Gr. Mumbai & ors. ... Respondents Mr.N.K.Mudnaney for the appellant. Mrs.K.K.Soraan for the respondent Corporation. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 23RD NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C.: 1. The appellant has moved this Court against the order of the City Civil Court dated 29.8.2009 partially allowing the Notice of Motion No. 2595 of 2007 preferred by the appellant. The suit before the City Civil Court has been filed in respect of the notice issued under Section 53(1) of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 (in short, M.R.T.P. Act). Two unauthorized constructions have been mentioned in the notice, “(i) the construction of the 2 brick masonry wall in the landing of staircase at 8th upper floor thereby reducing the width of landing at 8th upper floor, and (ii) unauthorized covering part of the terrace at 8th upper floor with M.S. frame work and fibre sheet roof. 2. The City Civil Court, after considering the submissions of the appellant held that brick masonry wall which was erected on the terrace had been constructed illegally. 3. The learned Judge, while disposing of the notice of motion has held that prima facie it was not possible to grant stay to the notice issued under Section 53(1) of the M.R.T.P. Act. However, as regards the second prayer, the learned Judge has restricted defendant No.6 from displaying a hoarding of more than 30 ft. x 20 ft. size during the pendency of the suit. 4. In my view, there is no illegality committed by the learned Judge while passing the order and, therefore, the appeal from order is dismissed along with the civil application. 5. The learned advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant be permitted to apply for regularization of the brick masonry wall. If such an 3 application is made within two weeks from today to the Executive Engineer, Building Proposals (City), the Corporation will consider it in accordance with law within four weeks thereafter. During this period the Corporation will not take any action in respect of demolition of the wall and for a period of two weeks after communication of the order to the appellant. ..... 4