ash 1 79caa-995.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.995 OF 2010 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 799 OF 2010 Ramkumar Jalan Public Charitable Trust & Ors. .. Applicants Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay & Ors. . Respondents -- Shri J.G. Damani for the Applicants. Smt. K.K. Soraan for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Shri I.A. Siddiqui for Respondent Nos.3 and 4. -- CORAM ; A.S. OKA, J DATED : 6TH APRIL, 2011 P.C. . Rule. Advocates for the respective Respondents waive service. The first prayer is for restraining Respondent Nos.3 and 4 from using the suit sheds and for sealing the same. 2. The relief claimed in the Notice of Motion on which the impugned order has been passed was for restraining Respondent Nos.3 and 4 from acting upon the permission for repairs dated 5th February, 2010 granted by the 1st Respondent-Corporation for carrying out repairs to the suit premises. The Applicants are not entitled to a drastic relief as prayed for. There is already a permission granted to Respondent Nos.3 and 4 by the Municipal Corporation. Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are claiming to be the tenants in respect of the shed Nos. ash 2 79caa-995.10 180 and 28A. Considerable damage has been caused to the said sheds due to fire. There is an undertaking dated 8th March, 2011 filed by the Constituted Attorney of the Respondent No.3 and the Respondent No.4 which has been corrected under the orders of the Court. In Paragraph 5 of the said undertaking, the said Respondents have stated that if ultimately the repair permission dated 5th February, 2010 is held as illegal at the end of the trial, the said Respondents shall restore the structure as it stood prior to the date on which the permission was granted. The undertaking of the 3rd Respondent dated 21st March, 2011 is tendered on record in which it is stated that his Constituted Attorney has filed undertaking as per his instructions. 3. Hence, the Application is disposed of by passing the following order. ORDER (a) It will be open for Respondent Nos.3 and 4 to carry out repairs in terms of the permission granted on 5th February, 2010. However, the work which may be carried out shall be subject to final outcome of the suit and in the event the Applicants succeed in the suit, the Respondent Nos.3 and 4 shall restore the position of the sheds as it existed on 5th February, 2010. The undertakings of the Respondent Nos.3 ash 3 79caa-995.10 and 4 in paragraph 5 of the undertaking dated 8th March, 2011 are accepted. (b) It is made clear that even if the work is carried out by Respondent Nos.3 and 4, they will not be entitled to claim any equity on that count. (c) Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are restrained from creating any third party rights in respect of the suit structures and from parting with possession thereof. (d) The hearing of the suit is expedited and the Trial Court shall make endeavour to conclude the hearing of the suit within a period of six months from today. (e) All contentions of the parties on merits of the suit are kept open. (f) The Trial Court will decide the suit without being influenced by the impugned order and this order. ( A.S. OKA, J )