: 1 : FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.360 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.423 OF 2008 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.223 OF 2008 IN L.C.SUIT NO.88 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.K.K. Pandey for the Appellant. Mrs.Geeta Joglekar for the B.M.C. Mr.R.P. Oza for Respondent No.3. Mr.M.V. Holmagi for Respondent No.4. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 25TH APRIL, 2008. P.C. : 1. The impugned order warrants no interference. The mere fact that in the gazette notification of 1988, C.T.S. No.17(part) is shown to be under the S.R.A. Act would make no difference. : 2 : Firstly, only a part of C.T.S. No.17 is shown. It is pertinent to note that a survey had been made of C.T.S. No.17. This survey was carried out after notice to the owners. There is nothing to indicate that the suit structures fall within that part. 2. Secondly, the structures which were on the said land had been demolished in 1997 as is evidenced from the records of Respondent No.1. The learned Judge has in detail stated that in the past also unauthorized structures had been demolished and the present structures have been reconstructed. 3. Mr.Holmagi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No.4 states that Respondent No.4 has not taken any proceedings in respect of the earlier demolition and in respect of the survey. That in fact would operate against the Appellant. There is nothing that restrained Respondent No.4 from adopting his own proceedings. : 3 : 4. In view thereof and in view of the other reasons furnished in the impugned order, no interference is called for. 5. The Appeal from Order is dismissed. The Civil Application therefore does not survive and is dismissed as such.