1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.847 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1044 OF 2009 Mohd. Irfan Mohd. Usman. ..Appellant. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai and ors. ..Respondents. Mr.H.S.Anand i/by Savita Dande for the Appellant. Mr. Vinod Mahadik for the Respondent No.1. Mr.V.R.Tripathi for the Respondent No.3. Mr.S.P.Thorat for the Respondent No.4. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 30/9/2009 PC : 1 This is an appeal filed by the original plaintiff who had filed a suit for injunction against the demolition. He obtained interim relief against demolition but according to him not withstanding grant of interim relief, structure was demolished. Aggrieved by the demolition, he filed a Notice of motion for the 2 relief under Order 39 Rule-2A of the C.P.C. This Notice of motion was partly allowed and the defendants were restrained from removing the plaintiff from the pitch, being the land left after demolition was carried out. The plaintiff was directed not to construct or erect any fresh structure on the aforesaid portion. This notice of motion was thus disposed off by an order dated 19.3.2009. Thereafter, the plaintiff took out a notice of motion of an order allowing him to put up plastic sheets on all the sides of this pitch. This notice of motion was dismissed and against the said dismissal the present appeal is filed. It is seen that, in the earlier notice of motion, the plaintiff was directed not to erect any fresh structure. This order is not challenged and has become final. This order was to operate during the pendency of the Notice of Motion No.1137/2008. That notice of motion is also dismissed. Apart from this, the Advocate for the plaintiff has not been able to show me any document which has the same address as the address of the suit property as shown in 3 the plaint and which would indicate that he would eligible for protection. In this view of the matter, the plaintiff cannot be allowed to put up anything including plastic sheet on the said pitch. Appeal is therefore, dismissed. 2 Advocate for the appellant states that the order protecting his occupation of the pitch may be continued for a period of four weeks from today. It is directed that for a period of four weeks from today, the pitch on which the appellant has erstwhile structure should not be given away or dealt with. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1044 OF 2009 1 As the main appeal is dismissed on merits, this civil application does not survive and the same is disposed off. ( R.S.MOHITE, J. )