- 1 - ao140.11 rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 140 OF 2011 Chandrakant Narayan Mestry & anr .. Appellants vs 1. M/s Pavan Sheth & Associates & anr . Respondents Mr.A.G.Damle i.b Mr. Ashish J.Dubey for Appellants Mr.S.S.Shah a/w Mr .Ashish Kamath i.b Zohair & Co for Respondent No.1. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J DATE: 10 th August 2011 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The appeal is preferred by the original plaintiff against rejection of his Notice of motion whereby he wanted an injunction against the respondents not to obstruct his possession over the suit structure without following the process of law. 3. It appears that the said structure is situated in slum area which has been taken up for redevelopment. The defendants were appointed as developers. Admittedly, on 11th January 2009 an - 2 - ao140.11 Agreement had taken place between the Plaintiff and the Defendants whereby the Defendants agreed to pay Rs.5000/- per month as house rent till alternate accommodation was made available or till he was provided permanent alternate accommodation in the newly developed building. As per the Agreement amount of Rs.55000/- was paid and learned counsel admitted that even after that some amount was paid as per said Agreement. 4. That Agreement was entered into on a representation of the plaintiff and on the presumption that the plaintiff was eligible for rehabilitation. However, later on after inquiry concerned authorities found the Plaintiff-Appellants in-eligible. That order has been challenged before the Appellate Authority by filing an Appeal by the Plaintiff. 5. Learned counsel for the Defendant-Respondent makes a statement that in case the Plaintiff succeeds in that appeal, the Defendants will still abide by the Agreement dated 11th January,2009. The statement is accepted. In view of this, I find no - 3 - ao140.11 fault on the part of the Defendants. Merely because the Plaintiff has been found in-eligible for rehabilitation, his structure cannot be protected which may result in stopping the complete development. Therefore, I do not find any fault with impugned order rejecting the Notice of motion. 6. In the result, Appeal stands dismissed. As the Appeal itself stands dismissed, Civil Application does not survive and stands disposed of accordingly. J.H.BHATIA, J