hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1063 OF 2008 N.S. Chati ... Petitioner Versus MHADA ... Respondent Mr. Omar Khaiyam Shaikh for Petitioner. Ms. Geeta Shastri. A.G.P,. for R. Nos 1 to 3. Mr. Deepak Jadhav for R. No. 4. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. R.S. MOHITE, JJ. R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED: NOVEMBER 17, 2008 DATED: NOVEMBER 17, 2008 DATED: NOVEMBER 17, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. . The Petitioner, a member of Respondent No. 4 society contends that Respondent No. 4 should not be permitted to redevelop the plot as they have failed to comply with the requirements of notice Exh. A to the Petition and more specifically condition No.4. That condition is submission of the letter submitted to the Registrar and indemnity bond in Form No. M-20. The learned counsel himself points out that there is appeal pending wherein the order passed by the Registrar has been stayed. . This is purely internal dispute between Petitioner and one hand and Respondent No. 4 at the other. Hence, this would not be a fit case for this court to exercise its extra ordinary jurisdiction. If the Petitioner has any grievance, as to whether the managing Committee is eligible to function, it will be open to him to raise the dispute under Section 91. With the above observations, Petition disposed of. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)