Narendra Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) ADMIT .
(2.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties. The points involved in all the three cases are same, therefore, these writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order. A copy of this order may be placed on record in connected matters also.
(3.) THE plaintiff - respondent No. 2 filed a suit for permanent injunction in the trial court against the defendants - petitioners alongwith an application for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC. The trial court dismissed the application of plaintiff - respondent No. 2 for temporary injunction vide order dated 25th June, 2008. Being aggrieved with the same, an appeal was preferred by the plaintiffs before the District Judge, Jaipur city, Jaipur on 26th June, 2008 which was transferred for disposal to the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge No. 2, Jaipur City on the same day. The first appellate court on the same day i.e. 26th June, 2008 itself allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order of the trial court dated 25th June, 2008 and restrained the defendants - petitioners from auctioning the disputed sites of the advertisement. Being aggrieved with the same, the defendants have preferred this writ petition.;