1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 552 OF 2005 SECOND APPEAL NO. 552 OF 2005 SECOND APPEAL NO. 552 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 984 OF 2005 VIL APPLICATION NO. 984 OF 2005 VIL APPLICATION NO. 984 OF 2005 ALONGWITH ALONGWITH ALONGWITH SECOND APPEAL NO. 547 OF 2005 SECOND APPEAL NO. 547 OF 2005 SECOND APPEAL NO. 547 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 982 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 982 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 982 OF 2005 SECOND APPEAL NO. 552 OF 2005 Shankar Dundappa Harge ... Appellant (Org. Plaintiff) Versus Commissioner, Sangli-Miraj-Kupwad Municipal Corporation & Anr. ... Respondents (Org.Defendants) SECOND APPEAL NO. 547 OF 2005 Govind Baburao Waghmare ... Appellant (Org. Plaintiff) 2 Vs. Commissioner, Sangli-Miraj-Kupwad Municipal Corporation & Anr. Respondents (Org. Defendants) Shri Sagar Kasar with Shri Kuldeep Patil, Advocates, for the appellant. Mr. N.V.Walawalkar, Senior Counsel, for Respondent No.1. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J J.H.BHATIA,J J.H.BHATIA,J. DATED: 24th October, 2008. DATED: 24th October, 2008. DATED: 24th October, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent No.1. 2. Both these Appeals arise out of the Judgments in Regular Civil Suit No.136 of 1992 and Regular Civil Suit No.139 of 1992 against dismissal of those suits. The Municipal council had issued a notice under Section 53 of the MRTP Act to the plaintiffs/appellants to remove unauthorised structure. The plaintiffs filed the suit and sought perpetual injunction. The trial Court dismissed the suits rejecting the contention of the plaintiffs that the notices issued by the Municipal 3 Council were illegal. Against dismissal of the suits, the plaintiffs preferred appeals which also came to be dismissed. It is an admitted fact that the construction was made by the plaintiffs without obtaining necessary permission from the Municipal Council and, therefore, the Council was within its powers to issue the notice for demolition. No illegality or irregularity in the said notice is pointed out. I do not find any substantial question of law involved in the present Appeals. Therefore, both the Appeals stand dismissed. 3. As both the Appeals are dismissed, the Civil Applications do not survive and stands disposed of accordingly. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (J.H.BHATIA,J.)