SHIVARAJ V.PATIL, J. - (1.) THE appellant has filed this appeal against the order dated 5.7.1999 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2203/99 in which the appellant was respondent and had appeared as Caveator at the time when the writ petition was being heard for admission. The order under challenge has been passed on the stay application filed by the writ petitioner respondent in the appeal.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant was asked a pointed question by the court as to how an appeal is maintainable against an order passed on the stay application. Learned counsel for the appellant asserted that the learned Single Judge has not appreciated the fact that the appellant was only a caveator and was supplied the copy of the writ petitioner only during the course of arguments. No indulgence was granted to the appellant to prepare reply and thereafter argue the matter. Learned counsel for the appellant has further asserted that the order under challenge has the effect of changing the situation wherein the appellant will lose his position. Learned counsel for the appellant further asserted that as and when an order has the effect of finally adjudicating the rights of the parties, that should be construed to be a judgment in terms of Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 (referred to hereinafter as 'the Ordinance') and an appeal should be held maintainable.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant placed reliance on a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Jethabhai Khatau and Co. v. Luxmi Narayan Cotton Mills Ltd. and Ors. : [1981]3SCR449 . In this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court entertained an appeal against the interlocutory order passed by the High Court under Article 136. Learned counsel has also asserted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been entertaining the appeals against the orders passed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C.;