1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE FIRST APPEAL NO.522 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.854 OF 2010 Miss.Lucy D’Silva .. Appellant V/s The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai .. Respondent Mr.S.S.Redekar for the Appellant. Mr.Vinod Mahadik for the Respondent. CORAM: R.G.KETKAR, J. DATE: 18th June, 2010. P.C.: 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 14th December, 2009 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Gr.Mumbai in L.C.Suit No.4917 of 2004. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Mr.Redekar, learned counsel for the Appellant, after obtaining the instructions from the appellant/plaintiff who is present in Court, states that he has instructions to withdraw the first appeal and that the appellant is ready and willing to submit a proposal for regularisation of the offending structure.He states that within four weeks from today, the appellant will submit the proposal for regularisation to the Respondent Corporation. He further submits that the Appellant is ready and willing to give an undertaking to this Court within a period of two weeks from today, incorporating therein that the appellant has not so far created any third party interest in respect of the offending structure & shall not create any third party interest hereafter, and further incorporating therein that in case the Corporation does not regularise the offending structure, the appellant will demolish the offending structure within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the communication from the Corporation. 3. In view of this, it is directed that the appellant shall submit the proposal for 2 regularisation within a period of four weeks from today. After receipt of the said proposal, the Respondent Corporation shall consider the said proposal in accordance with law within a period of four weeks and shall communicate its decision to the appellant. 4. The Corporation shall not take any action in respect of the offending structure for a period of four weeks after its communication to the appellant, so as to enable the appellant to remove the structure. 5. In view of the above, appeal is allowed to be withdrawn. Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn, with no order as to costs. 6. In view of the dismissal of the appeal itself, no order is necessary in the Civil Application No.854 of 2010. Civil Application No.854 of 2010 stands dismissed. (R.G.KETKAR, J.)