IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL APPEAL APPEAL NO. 412 OF 2006. NO. 412 OF 2006. NO. 412 OF 2006. IN IN IN NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1283 OF 2006 OF MOTION NO. 1283 OF 2006 OF MOTION NO. 1283 OF 2006 IN IN IN SUIT SUIT SUIT NO. 1133 OF 2006 NO. 1133 OF 2006 NO. 1133 OF 2006 Jerome Burnard Lobo and others. ... Appellants. Versus. M/s.Fairy Apartment Coop.Housing Society Ltd. and others. ... Respondents. Ms.Sumedha Rao for the Appellants. Shri Bharat Zaveri for Respondent No.1. Shri Armin Wandrewala i/by M/s.P.M. & Mithi for Respodnent No.3. CORAM CORAM CORAM : KSHITIJ R.VYAS, C.J., & : KSHITIJ R.VYAS, C.J., & : KSHITIJ R.VYAS, C.J., & ABHAY ABHAY ABHAY S.OKA, J. S.OKA, J. S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : June 13, 2006. : June 13, 2006. : June 13, 2006. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 24th April 2006 passed by the learned single Judge refusing to grant ad-interim relief as prayed in the Notice of Motion. It may, however, be noted that the learned single Judge protected the interest of the Appellant by restraining the Respondents Nos.1, 2 and 3 from disconnecting the water and electricity connections. So far as the other prayers in the Notice of Motion are concerned, the learned single Judge has issued notice to the Respondents with a direction to file their replies. The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents submitted that this Court may not : 2 : 2 : 2 : interfere in the matter in view of the subsequent development that the building has been demolished and therefore, the prayer made in the Notice of Motion itself does not survive. 2. After having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, we hardly see any reason to interfere with the impugned order at this stage. As regards the subsequent event, the Appellants can either amend the present Notice of Motion or file a fresh Notice of Motion seeking appropriate relief, subject of course to the rights of the otherside to oppose the same. In this view of the matter, we see no merit in the present Appeal. We, therefore, dismiss the same with the observation made above. CHIEF CHIEF CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE JUSTICE ABHAY ABHAY ABHAY S.OKA, J. S.OKA, J. S.OKA, J.