JUDGMENT

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1) Leave granted.

2) These appeals are filed by defendant No.6 against the order dated 29.05.2015 of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench at Jaipur in Civil Misc. Appeal Nos. 1640 and 1641 of 2015 whereby the High Court set aside and quashed the order dated 10.04.2015 passed by the Additional District Judge No.4, Kota in Temporary Injunction Application bearing Civil Misc. Case No.112 of 2014 in Civil Suit No.89 of 2014 and Temporary Injunction Application bearing Civil Misc. Case No.37 of 2014 in Civil Suit No. 21 of 2014 whereby the injunction applications filed by the plaintiff/applicant (respondent No.1) were dismissed.

3) In order to appreciate the issue involved in these appeals, which lies in a narrow compass, it is necessary to state few relevant facts taken from the appeal paper books.

4) The appellant is defendant No. 6 whereas respondent No. 1 is the plaintiff and the remaining respondents are the defendants in the civil suits out of which these appeals arise.

5) The dispute, which is the subject matter of the civil suits, is between the family members of one Bhargava family, who are sisters, brother and the mother -being the legal representatives of Late Nandan Bhargava. The appellant is the purchaser of the suit land from some members of the family.

6) The dispute relates to agricultural land of 18 Bigha 11 Biswa in total bearing Khasra Nos. 68, 46, 51, 54, 53, 48, 50, 49 and 52 (now re-numbered as Khasra Nos. 92 to 111) situated at Village Khedli Purohit (Kota) Rajasthan and some houses situated at Jaipur/Kota as detailed in the plaints (hereinafter referred to as the "suit property"). So far as these appeals are concerned, they relate to suit property only.

7) Late Nandan Bhargava was the original owner of the suit property. He died on 28.10.1980 leaving behind his wife, four daughters and one son. On his death, some legal representatives of Late Nandan Bhargava sold the suit land to the appellant. This gave rise to the dispute between the legal representatives regarding the extent of the share held by each legal representative, their exclusive possession over their share in the suit property, their rights to deal and sell the suit property etc.

8) Respondent No. 1, therefore, filed two civil suit being C.S No 21/2014 and C.S. No. 89 of 2014 in the Court of Additional District Judge No. 4, Kota against respondent Nos. 2 to 8 and the appellant herein. The suits are filed seeking therein the reliefs of declaration of title over the suit property, partition, cancellation of sale deeds and permanent injunction in relation to the suit property etc. In substance, the case of respondent No. 1 (plaintiff) is that she being one of the daughters of Late Nandan Bhargava is entitled to claim her 1/6th share in the suit property and is also entitled to be placed in possession of her exclusive share by effecting partition amongst all the co-sharer by meets and bounds because Late Nandan Bhargava (her father) died intestate. The plaintiff has also questioned the legality of the sale made by the other co-sharers (legal representatives) in favour of the appellant.

9) The defendants have denied the plaintiff's claim and justified the sale made by them. So far as the appellant is concerned, they alleged that they being the bona fide purchaser of the suit land for value without notice of any prior claim of any one, their title to the land acquired by sale deed is unimpeachable and thus legal. Apart from their defenses, the respective defendants have also taken several other pleas on points of law and facts in their written statements while opposing the suit which we do not consider it necessary to mention in detail here.

10) The plaintiff also moved two applications under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code and sought temporary injunction against the defendants restraining the defendants from transferring or alienating the suit property, dispossessing