1 AO-ST-17076-11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST) NO.17076 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION (ST) NO. 17079 OF 2011 OM NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 542 OF 2011 IN L.C. SUIT NO. 249 OF 2011 Ampson Plastics Pvt.Ltd. ... Appellants (Org. Plaintiffs) Vs. Municipal Corporatin of Greater Mumbai & Anr. ... Respoondents Mr. P.M.Shah,Advocate, for the appellant Ms. K.K.Soraan,Advocate for the respondent No.1. Mr. Sachin Joshi, Advocate, for respondent No.3. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 4th July, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Office objections waived. Appeal and the application be registered. 2. Notice of Motion No. 542/2011 in S.C.Suit no.249/2011 filed by the present plaintiff/appellant was dismissed by the trial Court by the impugned order dated 20.6.2011. In para 5 of the impugned order, the trial Court noted that exact 2 AO-ST-17076-11.sxw area of the demolished portion and what is remaining portion is not mentioned either by the plaintiff or by the defendant in the pleadings in the Notice of Motion. The learned Counsel for the plaintiff/appellant contends that for bringing this on record, the plaintiff had taken out Chamber Summons No.284/2011 before disposal of the Notice of Motion. However, the learned Judge without deciding the Chamber Summons proceeded to dispose of the Notice of Motion and that is how he committed error. On perusal of the record, I am satisfied that the learned trial Court committed error in not deciding the Chamber Summons before Notice of Motion. 3. In view of the above, the Appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The trial Court is directed to first decide the Chamber Summons No. 284/2011 and thereafter to hear the Notice of Motion No. 542/2011 and decide the same as per law. 4. Status quo order which was granted by the trial Court shall continue till the disposal of the said Notice of Motion. Appeal and the Application stand disposed of accordingly. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)