1 12.ao.1064.08.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION skt APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1064 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1305 OF 2008 Shri Hasanali D. Palsaniya ... Appellant Vs. Municipal Corporation of Gr.Bombay & Anr. ... Respondents ...... Mr.D.R.Shah for the appellant. Ms.Geeta Joglekar for respondent no.1-BMC. ...... CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATE : 30th AUGUST, 2010. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2 The plaintiff/appellant had filed a Suit No.2901 of 2008 in the City Civil Court challenging the Notice under Section 354 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (for short ‘the BMC Act). Ad-interim relief of temporary injunction was refused and the matter was adjourned for reply by the Trial Court. As per order dated 04-10-2008, the appellant was granted ad-interim stay to the trial. In the present Appeal, by an order dated 17-10-2008, ad-interim stay was granted. That order is still in force, while the Notice of Motion is also pending before the Trial Court. The learned counsel for respondent no.1-Municipal Corporation makes a 2 12.ao.1064.08.sxw statement that if reply is not filed by the respondent no.1-Municipal Corporation till this time, it shall be filed within two weeks and then the Notice of Motion itself may be disposed of. 3 Therefore, the Appeal stands disposed of with following directions: If respondent No.1-Municipal Corporation has not filed the reply so far, it be filed within two weeks before the Trial Court and on filing such reply, within four weeks thereafter, the Notice of Motion be heard and disposed of on its own merits. Till then, the Municipal Corporation shall not act upon the impugned Notice under Section 354 of the BMC Act. 4 The Appeal as well as the Civil Application No.1305 of 2008 stand disposed of accordingly. [ J.H. BHATIA, J.]