1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent-corporation and learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 & 3.

2. Admit.

3. With the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, this Appeal is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission itself.

4. This appeal takes an exception to the order dated 22nd April, 2014, passed by the City Civil Court, Dindoshi, Borivali Division, Mumbai, thereby dismissing the Notice of Motion No.362 of 2014 filed in L.C. Suit No.337 of 2014.

5. The said Notice of Motion was taken out by the appellant, seeking the relief of interim injunction, restraining the respondent Municipal Corporation from taking any action, much less that of demolition of the suit structure, in pursuance of the Notice dated 5.10.2013, and the order dated 30.01.2014, passed under Section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, (for short, called as, “MMC Act”).

6. The case of the appellants is that they are in possession of the ground floor premises of the building known as “Bharat Bhavan”, situated at K.D. Road, Ville Pargel, Mumbai. Mr. Bharat Vyas was the original owner and respondent Nos.3 and 4 are the present owners-landlords of the suit premises. Initially these premises, consisting of five shops with open space in front thereof, were let out to M/s Patel Syndicate. The total area thereof is admeasuring 269.84 sq meters. M/s Patel Syndicate was using the said premises for running restaurant in the name and style as, “Rasraj”.

7. Since June, 1966, one Mr. N. Muddu Shetty became the tenant of the said restaurant, after taking over the same from its earlier tenant M/s Patel Syndicate. In the year 1972 Mr. M. Muddu Shetty became the joint owner of this Rasraj Restaurant. The then landlord, that is Shyamsundar Bharat Vyas had accepted him as tenant in respect of the suit premises. The rent bill and the electricity bill of the said restaurant, however, continued in the name of M/s Patel Syndicate till they were transferred in the name of Rasraj Restaurant, in the year 2002. At present M/s Rasraj Restaurant is a partnership firm of which appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are the partners and are in lawful possession thereof as tenant. The certificate under Shop and Establishment Act, trade permissions and other requisite licenses are standing in the name of appellant No.1. Thus, as per case of appellants, they are in lawful possession of the suit premises.

8. It is further case of the appellants that they had made the representation to the respondent Municipal Corporation for assessment of the temporary shed, which was constructed in the open space in front of the restaurant. It was granted by the Municipal Corporation vide it's letter dated 18.01.1985, on payment of assessment charges from 1.4.1962 to 31.3.1965. It was also informed to the appellants that since the shed is assessed to the Municipal Taxes from 1.4.1965, hence, the appellant should clear the out-standings from 1.4.1962 to 31.3.1965 only. It was further informed that on appellant's compliance of payment of assessment charges for the period from 1.4.1962 to 31.3.1965, the matter will be processed further.

9. Thereafter by the letter dated 13.3.1985, the appellants were directed to pay the assessment charges and penalty thereon for the period from 1.4.11962 to 31.3.1984 for regularization of the front shed admeasuring 114.5 Sq. meters. Accordingly appellants have deposited those charges on 15.3.1985. It is also their case that prior thereto, by the earlier resolution dated 19.10.1976 the permission for repair of the said shed was also granted, it being prior to the merger.

10. Subsequent thereto, in the year 1989 appellants' had filed an application for carrying out repairs such as, “replacing broken A.C. sheet of roof and roof members by new ones and repairs and repairing of the existing flooring with tiles, plastering to existing BM walls and replacing false ceiling”, At that time as the landlord of the said pre