: 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.1218 OF 2009 Samarthmal Doshi ... Appellant V/s. Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai ... Respondent Mr.V.R. Tripathi for Appellant Ms.K.K. Soraan for Respondent CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DECEMBER 9, 2009 P.C.: 1. The Appeal from Order has been filed against the order passed by the trial Court refusing to grant interim relief. 2. It appears that notices were issued u/s 354-A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act to the appellant on 7.4.2007 and 12.4.2007. Those notices were challenged by the appellant by filing L.C. Suit No.1393 of 2007. That suit was partly decreed and the aforesaid notices were declared to be illegal and improper and were set aside. The matter was remanded to the defendant Corporation to decide it in accordance with law. It appears this order was passed in view of the fact that the notice u/s 351 was issued on 19.6.2009 during the pendency of the suit. While decreeing the suit, the trial Court had directed that an opportunity to be heard and for : 2 : production of documents must be granted to the appellant by the Corporation. 3. Admittedly, no hearing was given to the appellant by the Corporation before passing the impugned order. The appellant was not given an opportunity to produce the documents, if desired, in order to establish his contention that the offending structure was not unauthorised. 4. In my view, the action of the Corporation is incorrect inasmuch as it has failed to comply with the order passed by the trial Court in Suit No.1393 of 2007. Therefore, in my opinion, the trial Court ought to have granted interim relief in the present Motion. 5. The learned advocate appearing for the Corporation states that in these circumstances, the Corporation will afford a hearing to the plaintiff when he may produce the necessary documents which he wishes to rely upon to establish his case before the officer concerned. She submits that the hearing will be granted to the appellant on 14.12.2009 at 11 am by the Assistant Commissioner, `D’ Ward. She further states that appropriate orders will be passed after hearing the appellant within two weeks from that date. 6. The statement of the learned advocate for the Corporation is accepted and the Appeal from Order is disposed as follows: a) The appellant shall appear before the Assistant Commissioner, `D’ Ward at 11 am on 14.12.2009. He may produce such documents as are : 3 : necessary to establish his case that the offending structure mentioned in the notice issued u/s 351 is not unauthorised. b) The Assistant Commissioner shall pass orders within two weeks of completion of the hearing. c) In case any order adverse to the appellant is passed the same will not be acted upon for a period of two weeks after communicating the same to the appellant. d) No fresh notice is required to be issued to the appellant for appearance on 14.12.2009. The offending structure will not be demolished during the aforesaid period.