- 1 - ao377 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 377 OF 2011 in NOTICE OF MOTION NO.342 OF 2011 in S.C.SUIT NO. 460 OF 2010 Billal Ahmed Choudhary. .. Appellant vs Municipal Corpn. Of Gr.Bombay & anr. ..Defendants Ms.Nutan Moily for Appellant Ms.K.K.Saran for Respt no.1 Mr.V.R.Tripathi i.b.V.R.Tripathi & Co for Respt no.2 CORAM: A.S.OKA, J DATE: 27th April, 2011 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. The challenge in this Appeal is to the order of the learned trial Judge by which Notice of motion for temporary injunction has been rejected. The challenge in the suit filed by the appellant is to the order dated 13th February,2010 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of the 1st respondent Municipal - 2 - ao377 Corporation holding that the suit structure is unauthorised. Prayer in the notice of Motion was for restraining the 1st respondent from demolishing the suit structure. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the Assistant Commissioner while passing the order has not relied upon any material to show that the suit structure is not authorised. Learned counsel for the appellant states that similarly placed structures have not been demolished and the action against the suit structure has been initiated at the instance of the 2nd respondent so that frontage is made available to the property of 2nd respondent. 3. I have considered the submissions. The finding recorded by the Assistant - 3 - ao377 Commissioner is that the suit structure is unauthorised. A perusal of the documents placed on record shows that there is no construction permission granted for construction of the suit structure. There is no case made out that the structure is tolerable under any of the policies of the 1st respondent or of the State of Maharashtra. The trial Court has observed that in case of the commercial premises held by the appellant, a permanent alternate accommodation has been already allotted by the MMRDA. Hence, no case is made out for interference. Appeal from Order is accordingly dismissed. C.A.No.524 of 2011 is disposed of. A.S.Oka, J - 4 - ao377