1 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.425 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.556 OF 2010 Panju Dewa Poojari ..Appellant V/s. The Municipal Corporation ..Respondent of Greater Mumbai Mr.V.J.Hegde, Advocate, for the Appellant Smt.K.K.Soraan, Advocate, for the Respondent CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 22ND JUNE, 2010 P.C. . All that the learned Trial Judge held that the case was not fit for grant of ad- interim relief. He had not dismissed Notice of Motion. The Motion is still pending before the learned Trial Judge. Inspite of refusal by the learned Trial Judge to grant ad-interim relief to the Appellant on 30th March, 2010, till date without any help from this Court, the Appellant has protected himself. So 2 apprehensions of the Appellant were rightly held by the learned Trial Judge to be based on the Appellant's opinion. Hence, no cause for disturbing the Order refusing ad-interim relief made out. Appeal is dismissed. The learned Trial Judge shall hear and dispose of Notice of Motion on merits. These observations would not come in the way of the hearing of Notice of Motion on merits. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)