1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.1304 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1598 OF 2008 Sayyed Baba Mohammed Navab Imammiya and anr. : Appellants versus The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr. : Respondents Shri.Suresh Gole for the Appellants.. Ms.K.K.Soraan for the Respondents-BMC Mr.Anand Patil, AGP, for the State. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : JANUARY 05, 2009 P.C. 1. The above Appeal is directed against the order dated 17th September 2008 passed in Contempt Motion No.5491 of 2000 filed by the Plaintiffs alleging contempt against the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 in L.C.Suit No.5208 of 2000 in the matter of demolition of the structure of the Plaintiffs. 2. The Plaintiffs had filed said L.C.Suit No.5208 of 2000 2 claiming the relief that the Defendants should not evict him without following due process of law. In the Notice of Motion No.3612 of 2000 filed by the Plaintiffs in the said suit, an order came to be passed on 5th September 2000 restraining the Defendants from pulling down the disputed structure till further orders and the said motion was adjourned for hearing to 14th November 2000. The counsel for the parties are not in a position to make a statement one way or the other, whether the said Notice of Motion is pending. 2. However, Public Interest Litigation being Writ Petition No.478 of 2006 came to be filed in this Court in respect of Haji Ali Dargha in which an order came to be passed for removal of the unauthorised structures in the vicinity of the said Haji Ali Dargha. It is pursuant to the said order passed by this Court in the said PIL No.478 of 2006 that the Plaintiffs' hut came to be demolished on 24/10/2000, as according to the Defendants, the same is not protected under any policy of the State Government. 3. The trial Court has rejected the motion for contempt on the 3 ground that on the date when the said demolition took place, the order of the City Civil Court was not pointed out to the Defendants. In my view, considering the fact that the demolition has been carried out pursuant to the order passed by this Court in the said PIL No.478 of 2006, and also in view of the fact that the structure of the Appellants was not protected in any manner under any policy of the State Government, the order impugned does not require any interference at the hands of this Court. The above Appeal is accordingly dismissed. 4. In view of dismissal of the above Appeal, the Civil Application does not survive and is disposed of as such. [R.M.SAVANT, J]