As per case facts, respondents sought permission for a multi-storey building. An initial sanction for an eight-storey building in April 1985 lapsed as no construction began within two years due ... to disputes. Respondents subsequently applied for a revised plan and renewal, and later for a twelve-floor building. They proceeded with construction based on 'deemed permission' after no orders were passed within the statutory period. When obstructed, they filed a writ petition, which the High Court allowed, permitting interim ground floor construction and later upholding their right to build. The Municipal Corporation appealed, arguing the initial plan lapsed, renewal was not permissible, and the twelve-floor plan violated existing height restrictions. The central legal question arose whether construction based on a 'deemed sanctioned plan' for a twelve-storey building was permissible when the statutory construction period had expired without commencement, and if such a plan violated prevailing building regulations, especially concerning maximum height. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that the respondents were not legally entitled to construct based on the deemed sanctioned plan after its two-year validity period expired in September 1989, as no construction had commenced. The High Court erred in permitting a twelve-storey building. However, considering the ground floor construction already completed under interim court orders, it was allowed to be retained. The respondents were permitted to construct two additional floors, ensuring the total height did not exceed eight meters, and at no point exceeding nine meters, subject to current building rules.