: 1 : USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.549 OF 2009 Sudhir Tukaram Chavan .. Appellant V/s. Municipal Corporation of Gr. Bombay & Ors. .. Respondents ..... Mr. R.A. Thorat a/w Mr. P.B. Gujar for the appellant Mr. P.G. Lad, Spl. Counsel with Mr. J.Xavier for respondent No.1-BMC Mr. Pramod Kathane i/by Prashant D. Jadhav for respondent No.2. ..... CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATE : 3rd JULY, 2009. P.C. : 1. The appellant herein instituted the suit for declaration that the appellant is a permanent tenant / allottee of the Corporation in regard to the suit premises which is situate below Keshavsut Flyover Bridge, Dadar, Mumbai in accordance with the policy framed by the Corporation for allotting the places. : 2 : The appellant also sought some other ancillary reliefs keeping in view frame of the suit. The suit was filed in City Civil Court at Bombay being L.C. Suit No.3571 of 2007. The learned Judge of the City Civil Court tried the said suit and by judgment and decree dated 28 th January, 2009 dismissed the suit, against which this first appeal is filed. 2. At the outset, it will have to be mentioned that the appellant was granted the suit premises for a period of 11 months on leave and license basis and the period of the said license came to an end on 31 st August, 2007. The appellant has thereafter lost the possession and in any case as of today the appellant is not in a possession of the suit premises. 3. Today when the appeal was taken up for hearing, learned advocate Mr. Thorat submitted that the Corporation had passed resolution on 27.05.2009. The learned advocate Mr. Thorat had tendered in the Court xerox copy of extract of minutes held in the presence of Additional Commissioner (City) and as many as 10 person holding different designation in the setup of Corporation were present in the said meeting. Perusal : 3 : of the said minutes goes to indicate that the appellant was entitled to get the suit premises on certain terms and conditions set out in the said resolution. The appellant is banking on this resolution. As the matter was called out, learned advocate Mr. Lad appearing on behalf of the Corporation tendered in the Court Office Note which says that the Corporation will abide by the orders of the Court and no licence will be conferred on the appellant. 4. A perusal of the minutes held before the Additional Commissioner may go to show that appellant is to get the suit premises on certain terms and conditions. The Corporation now wants to go back on those minutes. Learned advocate Mr. Thorat submitted that there is also a policy framed by the Corporation for renewal of license as regards allotment of the premises below the bridges. 5. In my view, when the Corporation has taken certain decision in its minutes and that there is some policy framed by Corporation it will be open for the appellant to persue the minutes arrived at in the : 4 : decision before the Additional Commissioner as also persue the policy which is framed by the Corporation to which reference is made by learned advocate Mr. Thorat. For this the appellant will have to file appropriate proceedings and therefore it will not be proper for this Court to interfere in the impugned order which was passed. In any case, the possession is no more with the appellant as the license period is over. In view of the above, I propose to dispose of the first appeal by passing following order. ORDER . As the appellant has lost possession of the suit premises, there is no need for this Court to go into the merits of this decision and to that extent matter is disposed of. . It is open for the appellant to persue policy of the Corporation to which reference made by learned advocate Mr. Thorat as also Minutes of the meeting held before the Additional Commissioner (City) by instituting appropriate proceedings in an appropriate forum. No view are expressed on merits of the matter as regards the use of the said policy or use of the said minutes by the appellant. : 5 : . In order to enable the appellant to take steps to persue the said policy as well as minutes, some time will have to ge given to appellant and the suit premises should not be allotted to any body for some time. Hence, it is hereby ordered that the Corporation shall not allot to suit premises to anybody else till 15 th July, 2009. . If appellant institutes proceedings before an appropriate forum, appellant shall serve copy of those proceedings upon Corporation in its legal department as also serve the copy of these proceedings upon advocate for respondent No.2, give 48 hours notice and then move the said forum. . Civil Application No.1694 of 2009 and Civil Application No.1695 of 2009 are disposed of with no order as to costs in view of the disposal of the appeal. Parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. (R.Y. Ganoo, J.)