P.K.LOHRA,J. - (1.) Appellant-plaintiff has preferred this appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 read with Section 104 CPC to assail order dated 06.04.2018 passed by Additional District Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh (for short, 'learned trial Court') rejecting her prayer for temporary injunction in a suit for specific performance of contract.
(2.) The facts, in brief, are that appellant laid a suit for specific performance of contract against respondent Nos.1 to 4 seeking enforcement of agreement to sale dated 25.10.2013. Along with the plaint, appellant also preferred an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC for temporary injunction in which a prayer was made to restrain respondents from alienating the land in question, which is subject-matter of agreement to sale and further not to disturb her possession over the land in question. The temporary injunction application was contested by respondents wherein execution of agreement to sale itself was specifically denied by them besides incorporating other objections.
(3.) Learned trial Court, after hearing submissions of the rival parties, examined the three necessary ingredients; viz., prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss. Upon scrutinizing the available material, learned trial Court has recorded definite finding that appellant-plaintiff has failed to prove prima facie case in her favour. Besides that, learned trial Court has also recorded its finding on other ingredients against her for refusal of temporary injunction.;