1 caf837-11 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURSIDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 837 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 447 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or orders or directions & Judge’s orders. Registrar’s orders. ..... Mr. M. N. Dhamal for the applicants. Mr. Rajesh P. Khobragade for respondent No.1. Mr. Vinod Mahadik for respondent No.2 – BMC. ..... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : AUGUST 9, 2011. P.C.: Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicants. Applicants are original defendant Nos.2 to 6. Clause (1) of the operative part of the impugned decree reads thus: “ It is declared that the disputed structure erected by Defendant Nos. 2 to 6 is illegal and unauthorized.” 2. The learned counsel appearing for the applicants on instructions of the applicants states that the applicants are not concerned with the 2 caf837-11 said disputed structure which is held to be illegal and unauthorized. He states that Appeal has been preferred only because stigma has been attached against the applicants by the impugned decree. 3. As the applicants are not concerned with the disputed structure, there is no prejudice to them if the said structure is demolished. Hence, no case is made out for grant of stay. Application is rejected. (A.S.OKA, J.)