IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 1832 of 2003 WRIT PETITION NO. 1832 of 2003 WRIT PETITION NO. 1832 of 2003 Suryakant Raghunath Varak & Anr....Petitioners Versus Narhar Chintaman Athavale & Anr. ..Respondents Mr. A.K. Dubay, for the Petitioners. Mr.Chandrakant Chavan, for the Respondent CORAM : V.C. DAGA, J. CORAM : V.C. DAGA, J. CORAM : V.C. DAGA, J. DATED : 25TH SEPTEMBER,2008 DATED : 25TH SEPTEMBER,2008 DATED : 25TH SEPTEMBER,2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. . Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, who after having gone through the prayer clauses of the petition agreed that the challenge to para.9 of the order dated 25th October, 2001 passed by the Division Bench of the Small Causes Court does not survive in view of the demolition of the entire building and reconstruction thereof. The prayer clause (b) is the only substantive prayer in the petition which has become infructuous in view of subsequent event. . If the petitioner has any other grievance in respect of the construction or quality thereof and/or the illegality arising therefrom, it would be open for the petitioners to resort to appropriate remedy as may be available in law. . In the result this petition is disposed of as infructuous since the cause of action to proceed with the petition does not survive. No order as to costs. (V.C. DAGA, J. V.C. DAGA, J. V.C. DAGA, J.)