1 mp t IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4279 of 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1650 of 2008 Mohd.Hanif Abdul Rehman & Ors. .. Applicants versus The Municipal Corportion of Gr.Mumbai.. Respondent ... Mr.Anil Singh i/b M/s.R.O. Pathak & Associates for the applicant. Mr.J.J. Xavier for the respondent. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 3rd October 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard. 2. This application has been filed by the applicants for a direction to the respondent 2 municipal corporation to restore the suit structure in the same condition as it was prior to the date of filing of the suit as the same was demolished by the respondent in breach of the order of stay granted by this court on 6th August 2008. 3. On Notice of Motion no. 2146 of 2007 in L.C.Suit no.2301 of 2007 taken out by the appellant, the City Civil Court passed an order of interim injunction restraining the respondent municipal corporation from demolishing, pulling down or removing the suit shops/stalls till the decision of the suit. While dismissing the suit on 9th July 2008, the City Civil Court directed that the interim order passed by it on 7th August 2008 in Notice of Motion no.2146 of 2007 shall remain in force for a period of four weeks. This appears to have been done to enable the appellant to move the appellate court for appropriate orders. Aggrieved by the decision, the appellant filed an appeal, bearing First Appeal St.no.17948 of 2008 which came up before this court on 6th August 2008. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent municipal corporation, this court directed that the interim relief granted by the trial court while dismissing the suit shall continue to operate till the next date which was fixed after two weeks. 3 Thus, the interim order of injunction granted by the City Civil Court on 7th August 2008 in Notice of Motion no.2146 of 2007 continued to remain in force till 20th August 2008. 4. Despite the order of injunction granted by this court, the respondent municipal corporation demolished the suit structure on 7th August 2008. In the affidavit in reply, the respondent has admitted that the suit structure has been demolished on 7th August 2008. Action has been initiated by the appellant separately for contempt of the court for breach of that order. This application is made for restoration of the structure which has been demolished by the respondent municipal corporation in breach of the order of injunction. 5. The action of the respondent clearly amounts to the breach of order passed by this court on 6th August. The respondent ought not to have been demolished the suit structure in view of the order of injunction granted by this court. In such situation this court is not powerless to issue direction to restore its suit premises to its original state. This order is necessary to preserve the sanctity of the orders passed by this court. 4 6. Learned counsel for the respondent municipal corporation submitted that Officers of the municipal corporation were not aware of the order passed by this court on 6th August 2008. I am not satisfied that the respondent was not aware of the order of injunction. Respondent’s counsel was present before court when the order was passed by it on 6th August 2008. He asked for time. Time was granted to him and while granting time, interim order was passed. Knowledge of the respondents advocate/counsel is the knowledge of the respondent. In any event, the officers of the respondent could and ought to have made enquiry with their law officers of the stay if they were to act in a hurry. Since contempt petition is pending in which the defence has been taken that the Officers who demolished the premises were not aware of the interim order passed by this court, I refrain from making any further observations. 7. Suffice it to say that despite the interim order passed by this court the respondent has demolished the structure in breach of the order. In my view, therefore, order needs to be passed to restore the suit premises to its original state. 8. Civil Application is accordingly allowed. 5 Respondent municipal corporation is directed to restore the suit structure/s demolished by it on 7th August 2008 in breach of the order passed by this court on 6th August 2008. Reconstruction shall be made within four weeks. In the event of failure to comply with this order, apart from any other action the applicant may initiate for breach of this order, the applicant shall be entitled to reconstruct as to restore the suit premises as they existed prior to the suit and recover the costs from the respondent. 9. Authenticated copy is allowed. (D.G. KARNIK, J)