ORDER

  Leave granted.

2. These appeals by special leave arise from the order of the High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench made on February 4, 1994 in Civil Misc. Appeal Nos. 294/88 and 3 II/ 88.

3. The admitted position is that pursuant to an agreement the respondents are alleged to have come into possession of the suit property for running the business of a hotel. It is the case of the respondents that the appellant was unlawfully interfering with their possession and running of the business. On the other hand, it is the case of the appellant that it is his exclusive property and the respondents have no manner of right to come into possession. Consequently, the respondents filed the suit for perpetual injunction restraining the appellant from interfering with their possession and running of the business. Pending suit, both the parties came to file applications. The appellants filed an application under Order 40, Rule 1 CPC, for appointment of a Receiver and the respondent filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 for an ad interim injunction. Though the trial Court had refused to issue the direction for appointment of Receiver, it had issued an injunction against the resp