JUDGMENT :

SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. That the present writ petition has been instituted assailing the judgment and order dated 02.04.2026 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 25.03.2026, passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur, in Temporary Injunction Application Case No. 127/2025, whereby the second temporary injunction application moved by the petitioner came to be allowed, has been dismissed.

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the respondent has repeatedly suppressed the material and chequered history of litigation pertaining to the subject matter and has approached the learned civil courts with unclean hands, actuated by ulterior motives. It was further contended that the petitioner is a duly registered society under the provisions of the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, possessing a valid registration certificate as well as a governing constitution. For the sake of brevity, the relevant extract from the constitution of the petitioner-sansthan is reproduced hereinbelow:

3. It was submitted that the genesis of the present matter lies in the order dated 03.02.2001, whereby the State Government accorded sanction for allotment of land admeasuring 726 square yards in favour of the petitioner and 1000 square yards in favour of another society, namely Hadoti Samaj, Jaipur, out of the facility area adjacent to Plot Nos. 508 and 509, Mahaveer Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur. Pursuant thereto, the Jaipur Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as “JDA”), after approval by the Building Plan Committee (hereinafter referred to as “BPC”), allotted land admeasuring 591 square meters to the petitioner, followed by execution and registration of the lease deed on 03.08.2001. The said allotment was subsequently challenged by Mahendra Singh and others by way of D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1270/2001 before the Division Bench of this Court, which came to be disposed of vide order dated 22.05.2015 on the basis of a settlement arrived at inter se the parties. In terms of the said settlement, it was agreed that Mahavir Sadhna Sansthan would suitably modify the allotment and that equivalent land admeasuring the same area would be provided adjacent to Plot Nos. 508 and 509 within the same facility area, subject to certain setbacks. It is pertinent to note that the husband of the present respondent was also a party to the said settlement. In furtherance of the judgment dated 22.05.2015, the petitioner society amended its bye-laws on 18.01.2016 with the predominant objective of aligning its functioning with the mandate of the said judgment, and submitted the amended bye-laws to the JDA for issuance of a modified patta. Consequently, a revised patta along with a revised site plan was issued in favour of the petitioner on12.02.2016.

4. It was further contended that this Court, vide judgment dated 22.05.2015, categorically upheld the legality of the allotment made in favour of the petitioner society and the action of the JDA in executing the lease deed. Notwithstanding the same, the respondent preferred D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 10326/2016 alleging disobedience of the directions contained in the said judgment, which also came to be dismissed vide order dated 06.09.2016. It was submitted that despite the aforesaid, the respondent, exhibiting a pattern of vexatious and frivolous litigation, instituted Civil Suit No. 81/2016 before the Court of Civil Judge and Metropolitan Magistrate (East), Jaipur, seeking declaration, permanent injunction and cancellation of the patta. The petitioner herein, in response thereto, preferred an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint; however, the same came to be dismissed vide order dated 28.09.2016.

5. It was further submitted that the parties have been embroiled in litigation for