redevelopment which means that at least 29 members of the first Respondent Society are not opposing the redevelopment. As a result of the demolition of the building, the said 29 members are out of possession. As stated earlier, with the passage of time, the prayer clauses (a) and (c) of the Notice of Motion taken out in the suit will not survive as the building plans have been sanctioned and as the building has been demolished. If the drastic prayer (b) of preventing the first and the second Respondents from carrying out redevelopment of the property is granted, the other 29 members of the first Respondent will be seriously prejudiced. Moreover, in the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has recorded that instead of the area of 244 sq. ft. of carpet area in possession of the Appellants, the premises having 329.40 sq. ft of carpet area would be allotted to each of the Appellants. Now, there is a statement made across the bar by the second Respondent that each of the Appellants and the Respondent Nos. 4 and 6 to 8 will be allotted a premises having an area of 535 sq. ft. of carpet area in the redevelopment building. Similar statement is made even by the first Respondent. The aforesaid statements are accepted as an undertakings of the first and second Respondents. In view of the said statements, we direct the first and second Respondents to inform in writing to the Appellants and the Respondent Nos. 4 and 6 to 8 the description of the premises which will be allotted to them in the reconstructed building along with a copy of the typical floor plan. The
