Honble CHAUHAN, J.—This appeal questions the validity of the order dated 4.5.2006, passed by Additional District Judge, No. 2, Jaipur District, whereby the learned Judge has dismissed the application of temporary injunction filed under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code (‘the Code’, for short), by the appellant.

2. In a nutshell the facts of the case are that the appellant filed a civil suit for specific performance, for declaration and injunction against respondent No. 1. According to the plaint, the father of the respondent No. 1, Damodar Lal, had about 15.18 hectares of agriculture land in Village Labana, Tehsil Amber, District Jaipur. After the death of Damodar, the respondent No. 1 inherited half the share of the said agriculture land. While he got 7.59 hectares of land, his brother, Gopal Lal got the other 7.59 hectares of land. On 3.4.2005, the respondent No. 1 and the appellant entered into an agreement to sale with regard to the part of the land owned by the respondent No. 1. According to the said agreement, the respondent No. 1 had agreed to sell the land for a consideration of Rs. 21 lacs. On 3.4.2005, the appellant paid Rs. 15 lacs to the respondent No.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document