Heard finally at the stage of admission in view of urgency expressed by the parties.

2. The Appellants/original Plaintiffs have challenged impugned order dated 30 November 2013 passed by the learned judge, City Civil Court, Greater Mumbai. The operative part of the order is as under:

“1. Notice of Motion No. 1396/2010 is hereby rejected.

2. Notice of Motion No. 3339/2013 is hereby allowed.

3. No order as to costs.

4. Notice of Motion Nos. 1396/2010 and 3339/2013 stand disposed off accordingly.”

3. Notice of Motion No.1396/2010 is filed by the Appellants/original Plaintiffs (First Motion). Notice of Motion No.3339/2013 is filed by the Developer/applicant (Second Motion).

4. The relevant prayers in Second Motion was as under:

“(a) this Hon'ble Court be pleased to vacate the order dated 16th June 2010 read with orders dated 19th October 2010.”

5. The learned Judge on 16.06.2010 passed the order of status-quo.

The relevant part was as under :

“At this prima facie stage it is clear that entire structure of the plaintiff Trust has been demolished by the corporation. Even it is submitted at bar by Mr. Gandhy that material of construction after demolition has been almost removed by the corporation.

It means as on today no structure is in existence. However plaintiff prayed for not to create third party interest or raising of compound wall by the MMC.

The advocate for deft has submitted she had no instruction from the office of MMC in detail.

Considering the fact of demolition as well as order of the Hon'ble High Court passed in Writ Petition No.1731/09 so also the judgments produced by plaintiff it is necessary to keep the premises as it is i.e. parties to the suit to maintain status quo of the suit property till next date.

Therefore I proceed to pass following order :

ORDER

Both the parties to the suit to maintain status quo In respect of the suit premises till next date.

Deft is directed to file reply.

Plffis directed to communicate the order to the concerned Ward Officer.

NM to be registered.

Adjdto 3rd July, 2010 for NM reply.”

6. By order dated 19.10.2010 the same order continued till further orders. The same has been in force till the passing of the impugned order.

7. The Second Motion i.e. 3339/13 was taken out on 6.9.2013 by the developer/applicant to vacate the above status quo order. Chamber Summons No.2006/2013 to implead as party as filed on the same date is still pending.

8. The Respondent/Corporation whose action challenged in the Suit by the Plaintiffs, never filed any application to vacate the status-quo so granted.

9. The Society was impleaded lateron on 20.4.2013 also never moved such application/Motion.

10. On 16.09.2013, the learned Judge rejected/not granted relief as sought by the developer in Second Motion being 3339/13. The same was challenged. On 10.10.2013 this Court passed the order and directed to expedite the two Motions, to be disposed of within eight weeks. The necessary observations are as under:

“3. The Suit filed by Respondent-original Plaintiff is still pending along with Notice of Motion/Chamber Summons so taken out from time to time, by the parties and have to be dealt with in accordance with law together. Ad-interim exparte relief obtained by the Plaintiff dated 16.6.2013/2010 extended by order dated 19.10.2010 till further order. That has been in force till this date.

5. …....However, it is made clear that the submissions itself so made by the parties and if it affects the project in question, it is desirable that the hearing of Notice of Motion No.3339 of 2013 itself be expedited. However, for the same reason it is also desirable that the Notice of Motion which is pending since long in which interim orders are passed also required to be decided early. However, certainly after giving an opportunity to all the parties to file necessary reply and/or document in support of their case.

7. Both Notice of Motions are expedited and to be heard and disposed of as early as possible, preferably within eight weeks, by giving op