: 1 : FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.560 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.648 OF 2008 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO. OF 2008 IN B.C.C.S.C.SUIT NO.984 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court’s or Judge’s orders of Coram, appearances, Court’s . orders or directions and . Registrar’s orders . -------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.J. Rayees with Mr.N.D. Jaywant for the Appellants. Mr.Niranjan Pandit with Ms.Ashwini Rupji i/b M/s.Nanu Hormasji & Co. for the intervenor. Mrs.Geeta Joglekar for the B.M.C. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 30TH JUNE, 2008. P.C. : 1. Admit and heard finally. 2. I will presume that the notice under Section 354-A of the B.M.C. Act is successfully challenged. The question however, remains whether the work carried : 2 : out in the suit flats is illegal or not. If it is illegal, even it was carried out prior to the notice under Section 354-A of the B.M.C. Act, the Appellants would have to suffer the consequences. 3. Moreover a notice under Section 53 of the M.R.T.P. Act has also been issued. The Appellants have also challenged the said notice by a separate suit. Permitting these suits to continue would unnecessary delay the effective determination of the legality or otherwise of the work carried out by the Appellants. 4. The above Civil Application has been taken out by Shreyas alias Ashok Narayah Pathare for the Applicant/ intervention. I have also heard Mr.Pandit, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the intervenor. 5. The above Appeal from Order is disposed of with the following order :- (i). The Assistant Municipal : 3 : Commissioner, G/North Ward shall decide the representation of the Appellants if made within two weeks from today to the notice under Section 53 of the M.R.T.P. Act. Even if the same has been decided already, it will be decided afresh after affording the Applicant in Civil Application No.648 of 2008 an opportunity of being heard. The parties shall appear before the Assistant Municipal Commissioner, G/North in the first instance on 15.7.2008 at 11.00 a.m. and thereafter as directed by the Assistant Municipal Commissioner. (ii). No further work of any nature except furniture work shall be carried out by the Appellant in the suit premises. No work which involves the structure shall be carried out. (iii). The Registrar (Judicial) : 4 : shall appoint an officer of this Court to visit the suit premises and make a report of the condition of the suit premises. The officer shall take the assistance of a photographer. The costs of the Commissioner shall be paid equally by the Applicant and the Appellant. The Applicant shall be entitled to visit the suit premises along with the officer and an Architect during the Commissioner’s visit. (iv). The Appeal from Order and the suit before the Bombay City Civil Court are accordingly disposed of. (v). The Respondents shall maintain status-quo in respect of the suit flats till the decision by the Assistant Municipal Commissioner, G/North ward and for a period of four weeks thereafter if the same is adverse to the : 5 : Respondents. (vi). It is clarified that the mere fact that the order dated 14.5.2008 was passed and the work was carried out pursuant thereto shall not regularize the work if it is otherwise contrary to law. (vii). In view of the above order, suit Nos.984 of 2008 and 1173 of 2008 also does not survive and shall stand disposed of in terms of this order.