1 mp t IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5141 of 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1955 of 2008 M/s.Creative Hotels Pvt.Ltd. .. Appellant versus The Municipal Corp. of Gr.Mumbai .. Respondent ... Mr.Anil Singh i/b D.R.Shah for the applicant. Ms.Vandana Mahadik for the respondent. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 18th December 2008 P.C.: 1. Learned counsel for the applicant prays for leave to withdraw the civil application. Request is made after the arguments are heard fully and after Is started dictating the order. Hence the request is 2 rejected. 2. By this application, applicant prays for stay of the enforcement of the impugned notice dated 20th January 2003. 3. The impugned notice was issued by the respondent municipal corporation as the applicant has changed the user of the basement from storage to a pub. Learned counsel for the applicant admits that the premises are being used as pub. He however submits that a health licence has been granted by the municipal corporation to use the premises for a restaurant. There is no difference between a restaurant and a pub and therefore it must be presumed that the applicant has been granted permission to use the premises as a pub. Therefore, the impugned notice needs to be stayed. 4. User of any property must be in accordance with the sanctioned plan and Town Planning Scheme applicable to the area. In the building plans, the basement was sanctioned as a place for storage. This was in consonance with the Town Planning Scheme. Health licence granted by the health department of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation cannot be construed 3 to be a permission for change of user. Such permission can be granted only by the planning authority in accordance with the Development Control Rules sanctioned under the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning authority for change of user has been obtained by the appellant. 5. In the circumstances, appellant is not entitled to use the premises for the purpose other than the purpose for which the building plans were sanctioned and the user permitted under the Town Planning Act. 6. Application is therefore rejected.