1 ao383-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION rpa APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 383 OF 2011 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 533 OF 2011 Hajra Mohammed Hasan Vali Memon .. Appellant V/s. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai .. Respondent ..... Mr. A. S. Khatib for the appellant. Mrs. K. K. Soraan for respondent -BMC. ..... CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATE : APRIL 28, 2011. P.C.:- Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. Taken up for final disposal. The challenge in the suit filed by the appellant is to the notice under Section 354A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) and order dated 18th March, 2011 passed thereon. The learned trial Judge has declined to grant ad-interim relief of temporary injunction. 2 ao383-11 2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has produced for the perusal of the Court the copies of the impugned notice as well as the reply dated 2nd March, 2011 and 12th March, 2011. He has also produced a copy of the order dated 11th March, 2011. The reply of the appellant appears to be that she had not carried out any construction as alleged and he had carried out renovation of the premises. Prima facie, it appears to me that while passing the order, the concerned officer has not properly considered the scope of Section 354A of the said Act. 3. In the circumstances, a case is made out for grant of ad-interim relief till the disposal of the Notice of Motion. 4. Hence, I pass the following order : :: O R D E R :: i. The impugned order dated 18th March, 2011 is quashed and set aside. ii. Till the disposal of the Notice of Motion both the 3 ao383-11 parties will maintain status-quo in respect of the disputed structure. iii. The Notice of Motion will be decided on its own merits without being influenced by the impugned order as well as ad-interim relief granted by this Court. iv. Civil Application No.533 of 2011 does not survive and the same is disposed of. JUDGE