MUKHTAR AHMED BHATI Vs. TUFAIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present civil misc. appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 read with Sec. 151 of CPC has been preferred by the defendants-appellants against the order dtd. 28/11/2023 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Makarana, District Nagaur (hereinafter referred to as the learned trial court) in Civil Misc. case No.50/2023 whereby the learned trial Court rejected the application filed by the appellants-defendants under Order 39, Rule 4 of CPC.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the appellants-defendants preferred a suit for permanent injunction bearing Civil Original Suit No. 40/2023 before the learned Trial Court along with an application under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 CPC against the respondents-plaintiffs with the averments therein that a commercial property admeasuring 209.03 sq. metres, situated at Old ward No. 10, Mauja Municipal Council (hereinafter referred to as the 'suit property'), was in the ownership and possession of the appellants. It is averred that when the appellants started carrying out construction activities over the suit property, the respondents-plaintiffs entered into the premises and stopped them from raising any further construction. In the suit, it was prayed that during the pendency of suit proceedings, the respondents be restrained from creating hurdles in the peaceful possession of appellants in the suit property. The present respondents filed their reply. Thereafter, vide order dtd. 12/7/2023, an ex-parte ad-interim injunction was granted in favor of appellants in the manner that the defendants in the suit shall not create any hindrance and dispossess the appellants from peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property.

(3.) Learned counsel further submits that while concealing the fact of passing of the aforesaid order dtd. 12/7/2023, the respondents-plaintiffs instituted another Civil Original Suit No. 50/2023 before the learned Trial Court seeking decree of declaration and permanent injunction against the appellants-defendants. Along with the plaint, the respondents-plaintiffs also preferred an application under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 CPC and prayed that the appellants-defendants be restrained from creating hurdles in the physical and peaceful possession of respondents-plaintiffs in the suit property and further be directed not to dispossess them from the suit property. The learned Trial court, vide order dtd. 13/9/2023, granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favor of the respondents in the manner that appellants shall not alienate the suit property and further shall not raise any construction over the suit property and the status quo with respect to the suit property shall be maintained.