Bela M. Trivedi, J. - (1.) THE present appeal has been filed by the appellants -defendants under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of CPC, challenging the order dt. 04.07.2008 passed by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track, No. 3, Jaipur City, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "the trial Court") in Civil Misc. Application No. 89/08, whereby the trial Court had allowed the said application filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 by the respondent No. 1 -plaintiff, and restraining the appellants -defendants from transferring, alienating and parting with the possession of the suit lands to any third party during the pendency of the suit. At the outset, the learned counsel Mr. Sudesh Bansal, for the respondent No. 1 has drawn the attention of the Court that prior to passing of the impugned order by the trial Court, the appellant No. 2 Smt. Geeta Devi had already executed one sale deed on 17.11.2007 in favour of one Smt. Vandana Gupta in respect of the suit lands and the said fact was suppressed by the appellants before the trial Court. According to him, the respondent No. 1 having come to know about the said fact has already amended the plaint and also impleaded the subsequent purchaser as party -defendant in the suit. The learned Senior Counsel Mr. J.P. Goyal, for the appellants has not been able to dispute the said submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.
(2.) IT is pertinent to note that the impugned order was passed on 04.07.2008 and prior that too the appellant No. 1 had already sold out the suit lands to the third party Smt. Vandana Gupta as per the sale deed dt. 17.11.2007 and the said fact was suppressed by the appellants from the trial Court. Under the circumstances, the appellants being prima facie guilty of having suppressed material facts from the trial Court cannot be heard on merits and the present appeal deserves to be dismissed on that ground alone. In that view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed.;