1 wp10267.sxw ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10267 OF 2009 Sadanand M. Naik ...Petitioner vs. Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai ...Respondent Mr.Chandrakant N. Chavan for the petitioner Mr.M.M.Malvankar for the respondent-M.M.C. CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 28, 2010 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. On instructions of the petitioner, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner does not desire to prosecute this petition. He prays that longer time to vacate may be granted subject to petitioner filing usual undertaking. He states that notwithstanding the undertaking given by the petitioner, the respondent- Corporation may be directed to decide the application dated 4 th December 2009 made by the petitioner for transfer or allotment of the premises in his name. 2 Hence, writ petition is disposed of by passing the following order : i) Writ Petition is dismissed as not pressed. ii)The order of eviction shall not be executed till 31 st December 2011 subject to condition of the petitioner filing usual undertaking to vacate the 2 wp10267.sxw premises. The undertaking shall be filed in this Court within a period of two weeks from today. If undertaking is not filed within stipulated period, the order of eviction will become forthwith executable. iii)It is made clear that time to vacate is granted only by way of indulgence as it is claimed that the petitioner has become handicapped due to ailment. Notwithstanding this order, the respondent- Corporation will decide the application/representation made by the petitioner dated 4 th December 2009 in accordance with law. iv)It is made clear that irrespective of the decision of the respondent-Corporation on the said application, the petitioner will be under an obligation to vacate the premises as per the undertaking. v) There will be no order as to costs. JUDGE