1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 617 OF 2010 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 794 OF 2010 AND APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 618 OF 2010 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 795 OF 2010 AND APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 619 OF 2010 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 796 OF 2010 Vijay More .. Appellant/ Org. Plaintiff V/s. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai .. Respondents Mr. A. M. Saraogi for the Appellant. Mrs. K. K. Soraan for the Respondent-BMC. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED : JUNE 21, 2010 P.C: These three Appeals are directed against the orders passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Dindoshi, Mumbai on 6th May, 2010, refusing ad-interim relief of 2 injunction to the Appellant in respect of his structures which are now sought to be demolished for widening of a road. These structures originally stood on private land which have been subsequently acquired by the Municipal Corporation for the purpose of road widening. Notice was given to the Appellant under section 314 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act. He had filed replies before the Assistant Municipal Commissioner enclosing his electricity bills and documents showing either his or his predecessors’ possession since 1978. It is the Appellant’s contention that these documents are not considered by the Assistant Municipal Commissioner. 2. The learned counsel for the Respondent Municipal Corporation states that upon instructions from their Sub- Engineer Mr. Panchal, in that case, the Assistant Municipal Commissioner would re-consider the replies sent by the Appellant in the light of the documents which they have tendered, within a period of four weeks. For that purpose, the Appellant shall appear before the Assistant Municipal Commissioner on 12th July, 2010. The Assistant Municipal 3 Commissioner would pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks thereafter and till one week thereafter, the Appellants structure shall not be demolished. 3. With these modifications in the impugned order, the Appeals are disposed of. 4. In view of the disposal of the Appeals, Civil Application Nos. 794 of 2010, 795 of 2010 and 796 of 2010 do not survive and are disposed of accordingly. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)