JUDGMENT :

1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 19.2.2020 passed below Exh-5 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), Mirzapur, Ahmedabad in Special Civil Suit no. 119 of 2019 whereby the trial Court has disallowed the application filed by the plaintiffs-appellants for interim injunction, the original plaintiffs have preferred this Appeal from Order under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of Code of Civil Procedure.

2. The appellants are the original plaintiffs and the respondents are the defendants before the trial Court. For the brevity and convenience, the parties are referred to in this order as per the nomenclature assigned to them in the trial Court.

3. The plaintiff has filed the Suit for specific performance, cancellation of documents and declaration of injunction in respect to the Suit property being land revenue survey No. 52 admeasuring 0-48-56 Hect - Are- Sq. Mtrs and Survey No.53 admeasuring 0 – 52 - 61, Hect – Are – Sq. Mtrs (Final Plot No. 79 admeasuring 7500 sq. Mtrs of the TP Scheme no.3 (Vejalpur), situated at Mauje: Vejalpur, District: Ahmedabad, on the following facts:

3.1 The suit properties originally belong to defendant Nos. 2 and 3, each having one-half share in the suit property. On 15.2.2017, notarised agreement to sell (Serial No. 250/17) was executed by defendant No.2 in favour of defendant no.1 with respect to her undivided one-half share of the suit property i.e. admeasuring 3750 sq. mtrs. On the same day, a Special Power of Attorney executed by defendant no.2 in favour of defendant no.1 regarding the one-half share of the property which was notarised (Sr. No. 251/17).

3.2 On 30.11.2017, the defendant No.3 executed notarised possession Agreement-cum-declaration (1695/17) in favour of defendant no.1 for her one-half share of the suit property i.e. admeasuring 3750 sq.mts. On the same day, defendant no.3 has also executed a Special Power of Attorney in favour of defendant No.1, which was also notarised (1696/17). That on 1.5.2018, a registered agreement to sell No. 1034 came to be executed by defendant No.3 (through Power of Attorney) in favour of defendant No.1 regarding one-half share of suit property. On 2.5.2018, registered sale deed No.1044 came to be executed by defendant no.3 (through Power of Attorney) in favour of defendant No.4 regarding her one-half share of suit property admeasuring 3750 sq.mtrs.

3.3 On 14.5.2018, a registered sale deed No. 1157 came to be executed by defendant No.2 (through her Power of Attorney defendant No.1) in favour of defendant No.1 regarding one-half share of the suit property. On the same day, a notarised MoU came to be executed between defendant No.1 and plaintiff whereby defendant No.1 agreed to sell the suit property to the plaintiff and the plaintiff had already paid Rs. 84 Lakh under MoU to the defendant No.1.

3.4 It is alleged by the plaintiff that the defendant No.1 has failed to get cancelled document, if any, executed by the defendant No.2 and 3 and also to execute the sale deed in their favour, the defendant No.1 did not care to do so. According to the plaintiff, they came to know from the Newspaper that notice for title clearance was issued by the advocate for the rest of the defendants and on inquiry found that various documents which includes cancellation of the transaction between the defendant No.1 and defendant Nos. 2 & 3. It was also revealed that defendant No.4 has executed sale-deed on 19.12.2018 bearing No. 6863 and it is also revealed that defendant No.2 has also executed a deed in favour of defendant No.5 dated 5.12.2018 vide No. 6802. According to plaintiff, thus, the defendants have joined