DINESH MEHTA,J. - (1.) By way of present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners-plaintiffs have challenged the order dated 16.02.2017 passed by the Nyaya Adhikari, Gram Nyalaya, Kherwada, Udaipur in Civil Misc. Case No.03/2015 and the order dated 16.03.2017, passed by the Additional District Judge Kherwada, District Udaipur in Civil Misc. Appeal No.02/2017, deciding the application for grant of temporary injunction filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
(2.) Petitioners had filed a suit for mandatory injunction contending inter alia that the defendants are raising construction on the land, title, ownership and possession whereof belonged to them. They had also filed therewith an application seeking Temporary Injunction inter alia stating that the defendants have trespassed over the land and started raising construction on their land admeasuring 55 X 46 ft. It was stated by the plaintiffs that they had transferred land admeasuring 225 X 178 ft. duly converted for the residential purpose in Aarji No.698 at Village Banjaria. Plaintiffs have given details/particulars of the land which was sold to the defendants viz, one plot each, admeasuring 20 X 53 ft to defendant No.1 and 205 X 53 to defendant No.2, by way of registered sale deed dated 04.02.1997 and 05.02.1997. According to the plaintiffs, out of the remaining part of the said land parcel, admeasuring 225 X 72 ft., one plot out of these two plots ad measuring 125 X 72 ft. had been sold to the defendant No.3, by way of registered sale deed dated 07.02.1997. The plaintiffs stated that the remaining part of the land was in plaintiffs' possession which defendants wanted to purchase, however, the negotiation failed and transaction could not fructify. As per the plaintiffs, on 29.07.2015, the plaintiffs went to the site when they found that defendants have illegally encroached over the part of the land admeasuring 55 X 46 ft. and have started raising construction thereupon. Plaintiffs stated that cause of action had accrued to them on 30.07.2015, when the plaintiffs refused to transfer the land in question to the defendants and they started raising construction on the subject land.
(3.) The respondents-defendants filed written statement in the Trial Court and opposed the present writ petition, by way of filing a detailed reply. It has been the stand of the defendants that the contentious land had been purchased by them and they are having title and possession over it. Showing the chain of title, respondents asserted that land in question had been purchased by them from Marta Ram and they have been enjoying the possession thereof.;