JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP SHARMA, J.

1. By way of instant application having been filed on behalf of defendants No. 8 to 12 and 16, under the provisions of Order 39 Rule 4 read with Section 151 CPC, prayer has been made for vacation of ex parte ad interim injunction passed by this Court on 1.5.2018. Perusal of order dated 1.5.2018, passed by this Court in OMP No. 119 of 2018 (wrongly recorded as OMP No. 92 of 2018) suggests that the defendants were restrained from selling, alienating, encumbering or transferring the suit property in any manner, but such order was subject to compliance of provisions contained under Order 39 Rule 3 CPC. Averments contained in the application suggest that though applicants/defendants were served by way of summons for putting appearance on 22.5.2018 but alongwith summons neither application for stay nor copy of plaint or documents so relied upon by the plaintiff was/were supplied. Applicants-defendants No. 8 to 12 and 16 have averred that since the plaintiffs failed to comply with the provisions contained under Order 39 Rule 3 CPC, adinterim injunction granted vide order dated 1.5.2018, deserves to be vacated.

2. Factum with regard to non-compliance of provision