1 ao289-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION rpa APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 289 OF 2011 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.416 OF 2011 Sayed Usman Shah .. Appellant V/s. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay .. Respondent ..... M/s. A. S. Khatib for the appellant. Mrs. K. K. Soraan for respondent – BMC. ..... CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATE : MAY 4, 2011. P.C.:- Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent- BMC. 2. In a suit filed by the appellant for challenging the notice and order under Section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”), by the impugned order, ad- interim relief of temporary injunction has been refused. 3. In response to the notice under Section 351 of the said Act, the appellant filed a reply. After considering the reply, an order of demolition was passed by the Assistant Commissioner. In the order, it is 2 ao289-11 observed that documentary evidence to show either authorization of the notice structure or its existence before the datum line was not produced by the appellant. The said order was passed on 9th February, 2011. Thereafter, on 24th February, 2011, the appellant addressed a letter to the Assistant Commissioner alongwith which photocopies of several documents were tendered. 4. On the last date, the Appeal was adjourned to enable the advocate for respondent to take instructions as to whether the respondent Corporation can consider the documents filed alongwith the aforesaid letter and pass a fresh order. However, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent has not received instructions till today. 5. In the letter dated 24th February, 2011, the appellant has relied upon certain documents of the years 1961 and 1978. These documents are required to be considered. Hence, the appellant deserves to be protected till the disposal of the Notice of Motion. 6. Hence, I pass the following order: :: O R D E R :: i. Ad-interim relief granted by this Court on 10th March, 3 ao289-11 2011, will continue to operate till the disposal of the Notice of Motion. ii. In the meanwhile, the Assistant Municipal Commissioner will consider the reply dated 24th February, 2011, filed by the appellant and the documents filed alongwith the said reply. The concerned Assistant Commissioner will pass a fresh order on the notice under Section 351 of the said Act after considering the said reply and documents. iii. All contentions of the parties on merits of the Notice of Notice of Motion are kept open. iv. Appeal From Order is disposed of on the above terms. v. Civil Application No.416 of 2011 does not survive and the same id disposed of. JUDGE