1 caf2612 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2612 OF 2010 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.947 OF 2010 Hirachand Chhogamalji Jain ...Applicant vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Sameer Bhalekar for the applicant Mr.D.J.Lulia for the respondent nos.2 and 3 Mr.Vinod Mahadik for respondent no.1 CORAM : A.S.OKA,J. DATE : APRIL 26,2011 P.C.: 1 The learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that on 18 th April 2011, the applicant has filed an affidavit stating that he has complied with the undertaking dated 1 st March 2011 and that he has demolished that part of the suit structure which is in excess of the area of 209 sq. ft. The learned counsel for the 2 nd and 3 rd respondents states that the facts stated in the subsequent affidavit will have to be verified. 2 Now, there is a statement on oath made by the applicants that he has complied with his undertaking dated 1 st March 2011. 3 The first respondent shall verify whether compliance has been made with the undertaking given by the applicant. If it is found that compliance has not been made, parties to the appeal can always apply for 2 caf2612 vacating the interim relief. 4 Hence, subject to what is observed above, application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to condition that even the applicant will maintain status quo in all respects in respect of the disputed structure. JUDGE