1 caf2313-11 rpa FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2313 OF 2011 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 891 OF 2009 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or orders or directions & Judge’s orders. Registrar’s orders. Mr.D.R.Zaiwalla , Senior counsel i/b. M/s. Divekar & Co. for the applicant. Mr.Vijay S.Gharat for respondent No.2. Mr.Vinod Mahadik for respondent – BMC. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : JUNE 24, 2011. P.C.: Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant. Perused the averments in the Civil Application. Grant of prayer (a) will amount to virtually granting permission to re-erect the structure which has substantially collapsed. The first respondent Municipal corporation has not granted such permission. Whether the first respondent can 2 caf2313-11 insist on landlord's consent as a condition for grant of permission to the applicant is an issue which will have to be decided in the Appeal. The prayer in the suit filed by the applicant was that the first respondent should be directed to grant permission to the applicant plaintiff to restore the premises. The said prayer has been rejected on merits by the impugned Judgment and decree. Considering the fact that the suit structure has admittedly collapsed, prayer (a) cannot be granted. 2. As far as prayer (b) is concerned, the Appeals of the year 1986 onwards are pending on the final hearing board. Therefore, as of today, no priority can be given to the Appeal of the year 2009. Hence, the Application is rejected. (A.S.OKA, J.)