JUDGMENT :

1. Since both the instant petitions involve a common controversy, though with marginal variation in the contextual facts, therefore, for the purposes of the present analogous adjudication, the facts and the prayer clauses are being taken from the above-numbered S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14929/2023, while treating the same as a lead case.

2. The prayer clauses read as under:

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction:-

(i) quash the order impugned dated 04.09.2023 (Annexure-8) passed by the Learned Addl. District Judge No.2, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Civil Appeal Order No.20/2023; and

(ii) the order dated 25.07.2023 (Annexure-6) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge No.2, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Civil Misc. Case No.60/2023 may kindly be restored back throughout; and

(iii) the temporary injunction application filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed with costs in toto; and

(iv) any other appropriate relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit necessary in the fact and circumstances of the present case be granted in favour of the petitioner; and

(v) Cost of the writ petition kindly ordered to be awarded to the petitioner.”

3. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the petitioner, are that petitioner instituted a suit for declaration and mandatory & permanent injunction alongwith an application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC with Section 151 CPC against the respondents before the learned Civil Judge & Metropolitan Magistrate No.2, Jodhpur Metropolitan, stating therein that the petitioner was having a land i.e. plot no. 45 & 46 in Khasra no.53 at Village-Banad, which was purchased by him through a sale deed from one Gopal Das. On the western side of khasra no.53, there was a land of khasra no.56 and the same was allotted to the respondents; whereafter, respondents also placed their board on khasra no. 53 for construction of administrative & residential block of police department and the possession of the land in question was handed over to the respondents.

3.1. The petitioner further stated that khasra no. 53 belonged to the petitioner and he was legal owner of the said land, and therefore he prayed for temporary injunction against the respondents restraining them from raising any construction over the land in question.

3.2. Thereafter, the learned Court below vide order dated 25.07.2023 allowed the said application and directed the respondents not to make any construction over the land in question and maintain the status quo in regard thereto.

3.3. Being aggrieved by the order dated 25.07.2023, the respondents no.2 to 5 filed an appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 CPC before the learned District Judge, Jodhpur Metropolitan (Appellate Court), whereupon the learned Appellate Court vide the impugned order dated 04.09.2023 allowed the said appeal, and quashed the order dated 25.07.2023. Thus, the present petition has been preferred claiming the afore-quoted reliefs.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner was having his owned, purchased & pattasud plots of land in question and issuance of the said patta was never challenged before any authority. It was further submitted that the respondents did not make any demarcation of the land for the purpose of allotment, and therefore, the impugned order is not justified in law.

4.1. Learned counsel further submitted that the learned Court below in the order dated 25.07.2023 observed that the petitioner is not claiming any right regarding the land situated in khasra no.56 and the presence of the board of the respondents over the land in question does not establish the possession of the respondents, and therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law.

4.2. Learned counsel also submitted that the respondents with an intention to encroach upon the land of khasra no.53 despite the fact that the respond