1. Rule. Heard finally by consent pursuant to order passed by this Court on 1st April 2013. The Petitioner has challenged legality of the impugned order on preliminary issue framed under Section 9A of the Civil Procedure Code (Maharashtra Amendment). The issue framed was as to whether the suit is maintainable in view of Section 149 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred as MRTP Act). Parties had chosen not to lead any oral evidence. The Court below decided the preliminary issue holding the suit as maintainable.

2. The facts briefly stated are:-

The plaintiff had filed Long Cause Civil suit no. 2642 of 2012 with a prayer for to declare the notice bearing no.AC/RC/BF-I/MRTP 53(i)/8437 of 2012 dated 29-10-2012 issued under Section 53(1) of MRTP Act as illegal, bad in law, extraneous, non-germane, issued upon irrelevant consideration and not enforceable in respect of suit compound wall as shown in photograph marked ‘A’ for identification in law. The plaintiff had added the word ‘Nullity’ in prayer clause by subsequent amendment to the plaint. The plaintiff decided to incorporate challenge to the order no. AC/RC/BF-1/MRTP 53(i)/8437 of 2012 da