JUDGMENT :

1. By this appeal, Appellant challenges order dated 24 June 2022 passed by the City Civil Court refusing to grant ad-interim relief of injunction against Notice dated 26 February 2022 for demolition of part of suit structure.

2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the Appellant-Plaintiff claims to be the owner of suit structure bearing house No.62/DC situated at Gawalkar House, Worli Koliwada, Mumbai 400 030. He claims that to be in possession of part of suit structure and the balance part has been let out to different tenants. Appellant-Plaintiff claims that he has carried out some tenantable repairs to the suit structure by replacing internal and external plaster.

3. The Designated Officer of G/South Ward of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai issued Notice dated 26 February 2022 under provisions of Section 354A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act 1988 (Act) to Appellant-Plaintiff alleging that he had unlawfully commenced and was unlawfully carrying on work described in the Schedule to the notice. Appellant-Plaintiff was accordingly called upon to stop execution of the work and produce permission granted by Competent Authority for execution of said work. In the Schedule to the notice, the unauthorized construction was described as under-

“Schedule (Description of work):

Unauthorized construction of (1) R.C.C. Staircase adm. approx. 4.5m X 2.1 m. by construction of 2 nos of R.C.C. Columns & Beams at 1st Floor. (2) Unauthorized construction of B. M. Wall adm. 6.0m X 3.0m height at 1st floor. (3) Unauthorized construction of 3 nos. of R.C.C Columns on 1st Floor. (4) Unauthorized construction of 3 nos of R.C.C. Column and R.C.C. Chajja Slab adm. approx 6.0m X 1.0m at 2nd Floor and (5) Unauthorized construction of parapet wall adm. 6.0m X 1.0m height at 2nd floor at Plot 62 DC, Gawalkar House, Golphadevi Temple Road, Worli Koliwada, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400030, India.

4. Appellant-Plaintiff filed reply to the Notice through his advocate on 28 February 2022 and denied that any work, as described in the notice, were being carried out at the suit structure. He contended that only tenantable repairs were being carried out for Holi Festival, which does not require any permission.

5. Appellant-Plaintiff instituted L. C. Suit No.486 of 2022 in City Civil Court at Bombay challenging the Notice dated 26 February 2022. During pendency of the Suit, Designated Officer of the Municipal Corporation thereafter passed Speaking Order dated 17 March 2022 holding that the Appellant-Plaintiff failed to produce any valid permission of Competent Authority (Executive Engineer Building Proposal) and directed him to remove/restore the notice work. It was further directed in the speaking order that failure to stop notice work would result in demolition thereof. Appellant-Plaintiff filed Chamber Summons No.439 of 2022 for amendment of the plaint for challenging the speaking order dated 17 March 2022. Appellant-Plaintiff also filed Notice of Motion No.1269 of 2022 seeking temporary injunction restraining Respondent Municipal Corporation from acting on the Notice dated 26 February 2022 and Speaking Order dated 17 March 2022 and from demolishing any part of the suit structure. Appellant- Plaintiff claims that during pendency of the Notice of Motion, oral directions were given by the City Civil Court directing Municipal Corporation not to take any action in pursuance of impugned notice.

6. The Respondent Municipal Corporation opposed Notice of Motion by filing Affidavit-in-reply. After hearing both the sides on the issue of grant of ad-interim relief, the City Civil Court was pleased to reject the prayer for ad-interim injunction by order dated 24 June 2022. Appellant-Plaintiff has accordingly filed the present appeal challenging the order dated 24 June 2022. By order dated 05 December 2022, this Court directed parties to maintain status-quo, which order continues to operate till today.

7. Mr. Saraogi, the learned counsel appearing for Appella