ARUN BHANSALI, J. - (1.) This leave to appeal has been filed by the applicants purportedly aggrieved against the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2015, passed by Additional District Judge No.6, Jodhpur in Civil Original Suit No.46/2012, which was decided based on compromise.
(2.) Various submissions have been made in the application seeking to indicate the status of the applicants qua the suit property and claiming that they are affected by the decree passed by the trial court and, therefore, the leave to appeal may be granted to them.
(3.) Learned counsel for respondent No.2 pointed out that during the pendency of the suit from which the present leave to appeal has arisen, an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC was filed by the applicants herein, which application came to be dismissed by the trial court on 23.08.2006 against which S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6473/2006 was preferred, which also came to be rejected by order dated 22.11.2006. Against the order passed by learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.42/2007 was filed, which was also rejected by the Division Bench on 19.01.2007 and in those circumstances once the application for impleadment by way of speaking orders have been rejected by the trial court and upheld by this Court while dismissing the writ petition and the special appeal, the applicants now cannot be heard to claim that they are affected by the decree and be granted leave to appeal and, therefore, the application deserves to be dismissed.;