Atul Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) An application (T.I. No. 39/2010) for temporary injunction was filed in the court of Addl.Civil Judge(JD), East, Jaipur Metro, Jaipur and on 17.3.2011, the plaintiff in that case wanted interim temporary injunction but his prayer for interim temporary injunction was refused and the case was fixed on 29.3.2011 for the reply to the application for temporary injunction.
(2.) That order, though was not appealable but an appeal was preferred by the enthusiastic plaintiff in the court of Addl. District Judge No.5, Jaipur Metro, Jaipur and while deciding that Civil Misc. Appeal No. 25/20111 on 20.4.20111, it was ordered by the appellate court that till the decision of the suit, the defendant will not use the basement of the residential premises for any commercial activity.
(3.) Now, the order dated 20.4.2011 passed by the court of Addl. District Judge No.5, Jaipur Metro, Jaipur has been challenged in this Court by the defendants under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Written ex parte arguments have been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners because non-petitioner no.1 has not given any appearance despite service. No one was present on behalf of respondent no.1 on the previous date of hearing also. In the circumstances of the case, I have gone through the record and also perused the written arguments submitted by the petitioner.;