1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 866 OF 2010 Virendra Singh ........Appellant versus Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai & anr........Respondent. Mr. Anil R. Mishra i/b Savina Bangera adv. for the Appellant. Mr. Vinod Mahadik adv. for the Respondent. CORAM: B. R. GAVAI,J. DATED : 30th August, 2010. P.C.: 1. Admit. (B. R. GAVAI, J.) 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2103 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 866 OF 2010 Virendra Singh ........Appellant versus Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai & anr........Respondent. Mr. Anil R. Mishra i/b Savina Bangera adv. for the Appellant. Mr. Vinod Mahadik adv. for the Respondent. CORAM: B. R. GAVAI,J. DATED : 30th August, 2010. P.C.: 1. This is an application for injunction restraining the respondent from enforcing the impugned notice dated 30-9-2006. 2. The plaintiff/applicant himself has admitted in the evidence that the suit structure is situated in the premises which affects the road widening. 3. It is a settled law that public interest shall prevail as against the private interest of the party. In that view of the matter I am not inclined to grant the prayer and the same is therefore rejected. 4. It is made clear that the appellant would be at liberty to apply before the Corporation for allotting alternate premises which shall be considered by the Corporation in accordance with the law. The application would be considered within a period of three months from today. 3 (B. R. GAVAI, J.)