: 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1237 OF 2009 Miss Vimalaben Dhanjibhai Vasani & Ors. ... Appellants V/s. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai ... Respondent Mr.R.A. Thorat for Appellants Mr.J.J. Xavier for Respondent CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: SEPTEMBER 22, 2009 P.C.: 1. The appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of the City Civil Court dated 13.7.2009. The appellant had filed the suit for a declaration that the suit structures should not be demolished pursuant to the public notice dated 24.2.2003 u/s 92 of the MRTP Act. The appellants had also sought an injunction against the defendant from demolishing the suit structure without giving a hearing to the others. 2. The trial Court has dismissed the suit on the ground that the Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. The trial Court has held that since it had no jurisdiction to try the suit, no reliefs could be granted to the appellant. 3. On a perusal of the compilation filed by the appellant and the impugned : 2 : judgment, it appears that the trial Court has held that the suit was not tenable in view of the provisions of section 149 of the MRTP Act. On considering the reliefs claimed in the plaint, in my view, the judgment and order of the trial Court cannot be sustained inasmuch as the suit was filed for an injunction against the defendant from demolishing the structure until the plaintiffs were heard by the Arbitrator appointed. After issuance of the public notice dated 24.2.2003 it appears that the Corporation has declared its intention to vary the scheme u/s 92 of the MRTP Act for incorporating the proposals of the revised development plan which was sanctioned in the year 1992-1993. The proceedings in that regard are still in progress. In view of this fact, the Court ought to have directed that unless the appellants are heard, the structure occupied by the appellants should not be demolished. 4. Mr.Xavier appearing for the Corporation states that the Corporation will not demolish the suit structures without following due process of law under the MRTP Act. This statement is accepted. Therefore, the impugned decree is set aside. The appeal is allowed accordingly. 5. In view of the disposal of the Appeal, nothing remains in Civil application No. 3308 of 2009 and the same is disposed of accordingly.