M/S. Abis Construction Prop. Mr. Abis Akhtar Rizvi v. Mr. Sukhram Ramshakalk Yadav And ANR

42-AO224-17+.DOC Atul

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 224 OF 2017 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 307 OF 2017 Abis Construction, Prop Mr Abis Akhtar Rizvi ...Appellant

Versus

Sukhram Ramshakal Yadav & Anr

...Respondents

Mr Akash Rebello, i/b Ravi Thankaian, for the Appellant.

Mrs Madhuri More, for Respondent No. 2-MCGM.

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED:

3rd July 2017 PC:- Civil Application No. 307 of 2017:

1.

There appears to have been some miscommunication between the Appellant and his Advocate and this resulted in a delay of 379 days. The delay is sufficient explained. It is condoned. 2.

The Civil Application is made absolute and disposed of accordingly.

3rd July 2017

42-AO224-17+.DOC Appeal from Order No. 224 of 2017:

3.

The Appeal is directed against an order dated 27th October 2015. The Plaintiff sought protection against demolition. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai has issued a notice under Section 351 dated 26th March 2013 with an accompanying order dated 31st May 2013. The 2nd Defendant is the owner of the land. The Plaintiff apparently had a shed or hut on part of the Plaintiff's plot.

4.

The learned Judge after hearing parties granted protection against demolition and essentially ordered that the status quo be maintained. The 2nd Defendant contends that this order is unviable and ought to be set aside.

5.

I disagree. The status quo required to be preserved pending the Suit. No other order was possible. To set it aside is to effectively put the Plaintiff out of court. The order cannot be faulted either in its conclusion or in its findings.

6.

The Appeal from Order is dismissed. No costs. 7.

The Suit will be decided on its own merits uninfluenced by the observations in the impugned order or in this order. (G. S. PATEL, J) 3rd July 2017