1 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1166 OF 2009 ALONG WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1447 OF 2009 The Bombay Xaverian Corpn. P. Ltd. ... Appellant v/s The Municipal Corpn. Of Mumbai & ors. ... Respondents Mr.Ravi Kadam with Mr.S.R.Nargolkar for the appellant. Mr.J.J. Xavier for the Corporation. Mr.V.V.Tulzapurkar i/by M/s.Little & Co. for the respondent No.2. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 23RD NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C.: 1. The appellant is aggrieved by the refusal to grant ad- interim relief by the City Civil Court in the notice of motion filed in Suit No.1953 of 2009. The appellant contends that, it had leased the suit property to the Desai family. According to the appellant, the respondent No.2 has been assigned certain rights by the Desai family unauthorizedly and in 2 breach of the agreement of lease arrived at between it and the Desai family. It is submitted that, as a result, the respondent No.2 has constructed a building on the premises and, therefore, it was necessary to grant ad-interim relief to the appellant staying any further construction on the property. 2. The Corporation i.e. the respondent No.1 has already issued a stop work notice to respondent No.2 and, therefore, this stop work notice protects the appellant. Mr.Xavier appearing for the Corporation states that despite the notice, respondent No.2 is flouting the conditions in the notice. This statement is contested by respondent No.2. The Corporation is free to take such an action as is available to it in law, against the respondent No.2 in the event the stop work notice is being flouted. 3. All contentions raised in the appeal will be decided at the time of final hearing of the notice of motion. 4. In case stop work notice is withdrawn, the Corporation will inform the plaintiff accordingly, immediately. 5. Appeal from order stands disposed of accordingly along with the civil application. 3 ..... 4