80. ao 172-10.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION . APPEAL FROM ORDER NO 172 OF 2010 WITH . CIVIL APPLICATION NO 240 OF 2010 WITH . CIVIL APPLICATION NO 388 OF 2010 ( ) Hiramani Lokmani Barthwal Sharma & Ors .. Appellants Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors .. Respondents . . . Mr G S Godbole i/b M/s Ashoka Law Firm for the Appellants . . . . Ms K K Soraan for Respondent Nos 1 and 2 . . . . . . Mr R V Govilkar i/b H T Pawar for Respondent No 3 : CORAM . . , . A S OKA J : DATE 7th , . FEBRUARY 2011 . .: P C 1. , The learned counsel for the first and second respondent on , instructions states that the first respondent has decided to withdraw the notice dated 21st January 2009 as the first respondent has decided to issue a fresh notice in respect of the . suit structure in accordance with law The statement is . accepted . 2 ( This Appeal from Order is preferred by the appellant original 1 80. ao 172-10.doc ) plaintiff for challenging the order of the trial Court by which the Notice of Motion for temporary injunction has been . dismissed 3. , In the suit filed by the appellants the challenge is to the said notice dated 21st January 2009 and order dated 18th March . 2009 As a statement has been made that the notice dated 21st , January 2009 has been withdrawn it is obvious that the order dated 18th March 2009 passed on the said Notice cannot be . implemented . 4 The learned counsel appearing for third respondent submits . that the Municipal Corporation cannot withdraw the notice , However this issue cannot be gone into in this Appeal . considering the limited scope of the appeal It is for the third respondent to challenge the action of the Municipal Corporation . of withdrawal of the notice in accordance with law 5. In view of the aforesaid statement of the learned counsel for , the first and second respondents there is no apprehension that demolition will be carried out on the basis of the notice dated 21st January 2009 and order dated 18th . , March 2009 Hence it is . not necessary to entertain this Appeal from Order Only on this 2 80. ao 172-10.doc , . ground the Appeal from Order stands dismissed 6. A grievance is made by the learned counsel for the appellants that order dated 6th September 2010 is not complied with by . , the Municipal Corporation As the appeal is being disposed of . it is not necessary to deal with the said submission If breach of , any order passed by this Court has been committed it is for the . appellants to take out appropriate proceedings in that behalf . 7 . Civil Application Nos 240 of 2010 and 388 of 2010 do not . survive and the same are disposed of . . , . [ A S OKA J ] 3 80. ao 172-10.doc 4