1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.605 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.782 OF 2010 Mr. Umesh N. Puthran ...Appellant. v. B.M.C. ...Respondents. Mr. Harshad Palwe ,adv. For the Appellant. Mr. P.G.Lad, Spl. Counsel a/w Mrs.K.K.Soran, advs. For the Respondents. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : JULY 25, 2011. P.C. 1 The learned counsel for the plaintiff/appellant states that in view of the statement made by the appellant before this Court on 3rd May, 2011, offending structure as per the impugned notice dated 31st January, 2009 has been removed and to that effect affidavit of the appellant is also filed. As the offending structure is already removed according to the appellant, nothing survives in the present appeal and also in the suit filed. Mr. Lad the learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation states that the appellant has removed only a part of the offending structure and not the complete offending structure. As the appeal is not filed by the Municipal Corporation nor it is contempt petition, it is not necessary for this Court to look into as to whether 2 complete structure is removed or not. Appeal as well as the suit filed by the plaintiff do not survive because according to the appellant, he had removed the offending structure as per the impugned notice and, therefore, he does not seek any further protection from this Court. If the Municipal Corporation finds that still there is offending structure, it can always take action after following due process of law by giving fresh notice. 2 In view of the above, appeal and application stand disposed off as infructuous. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)