Vineet Kothari - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE two courts below have concurrently rejected the application for temporary injunction filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. in the suit for permanent injunction. The plaintiff claimed that she and one Prakash Chaudhary, who was her paramour entered into an agreement to purchase the suit property situated at A -55/12, Arvind Nagar, near Kendriya Vidhyalaya No. 1, Jodhpur for a sum of Rs. 15,01,000/ - and under the said agreement, a sum of Rs. 51,000/ - was given as advance to the seller - defendant No. 1 - Surendra Bohra and she was in permissive possession of the suit property since the said agreement dtd.10.12.2007 and upon the relationship between her and Prakash Chaudhary straining, she was sought to be thrown out of the said suit property and therefore, she had to file the present suit for injunction.
(3.) BOTH the Courts below have found that no evidence was produced by the plaintiff - petitioner showing agreement of purchase entered into by her and on the contrary the agreement produced by the defendants showed that the said agreement was entered into only on 10.12.2007 with Prakash Chaudhary and by forging the said agreement, the plaintiff had inserted her name as party No. 1 in the said agreement.;