- (1.) WITH the consent of the learned counsels for the appellants and the respondent No.2 the appeal is finally decided at the admission stage. Notices to the respondent Nos.1 and 3 are dispensed with.
(2.) THE present appeal has been filed by the appellants-plaintiffs under Order XLIII Rule I (r) of CPC, challenging the order dated 23.04.2012 passed by the Additional District Judge, No.9, Jaipur Metropolitan City, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court ") in Civil Misc. Case No.78/2012 in Civil Suit No.106/2012, whereby the trial court has interalia directed the parties to maintain status-quo as regards the suit property, and as regards the electric meters fixed in the suit property, and has further restrained the parties from causing any obstruction to each other in the egress and ingress of the suit property. The facts in brief giving rise to this appeal are that the appellants-plaintiffs have filed the suit claiming their right of preemption to purchase the suit property and for substituting their names in place of the respondent No.2-defendant No.2 in the sale deed dated 28.03.2012 executed by the respondent No.1 in favour of the respondent No.2, and further seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants from taking over the possession of the suit property and from transferring or alienating or creating any charge on the suit property and also restraining them from causing any obstruction to the plaintiffs in using the said property. The appellants had also filed an application being No.78/2012 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 seeking the temporary injunction of similar nature. It has been alleged in the suit that late Shri Laxmandas was the owner of the property being house No.254 situated in Sindhi Colony, Bani Park, Jaipur and that the plaintiffs Nos.1 to 5 and the defendant Nos.1 and 3 were the co-owners of the said house. According to the plaintiffs, the defendant No.1 was the wife of Mangaram, one of the sons of late Shri Laxmandas, and she had 1/6th undivided share in the said house. It has been further alleged that the respondent No.1-defendant No.1 Smt. Rajeshwari Meghnani executed the sale deed in favour of the respondent No.2-defendant No.2 on 28.03.2012 in respect of her 1/6th share in the suit house, more particularly shown in yellow color in plan attached to the sale deed, admesaruing 83.33 square yards without giving any notice to the plaintiffs. According to the plaintiffs, they being the co-sharers of the property in question, and there being some amenities common between the two parts of the suit property, one part in occupation of the plaintiffs and the other in occupation of the respondent No.1, the plaintiffs had the right of preemption to purchase the undivided share of the defendant No.1. The appellants-plaintiffs having also filed the application for temporary injunction, the same was resisted by the respondent No.2 i.e. defendant No.2, the purchaser denying the allegations made in the plaint and further contending interalia that the defendant No.2 had purchased the property by executing the sale deed after giving the public notice on 20.03.2012 and they were in legal possession of the suit property. In the said application, the trial court had passed the order as dated 23.04.2012 as stated hereinabove, which is under challenge in the present appeal.
(3.) THE present appeal was filed by the appellants on 24.04.2012. When the appeal came up for admission hearing on 27.04.2012, the Court had passed the following order:- "Heard learned counsel for the appellants. Issue notice of the appeal as well as stay application to the respondent No.2 only. Rule is made returnable within two weeks. Put up on 16th May, 2012. Till then, the operation of the order dated 23.4.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.9, Jaipur Metropolitan City, Jaipur passed in Civil Misc. Case No.78/2012; Premchand Vs. Smt. Rajeshwari shall remain stayed and further defendant-respondent No.2 is restrained from entering into the suit property and interfering in the peaceful living of the plaintiffs-appellants. " ;