Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite party no.1.

2. Under challenge in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is an order dated 15.09.2014 whereby appeal preferred by the opposite party no.2 has been admitted and the order dated 06.08.2014 passed by the learned trial court has been stayed.

3. The facts, which are necessary for adjudication of the issue raised by learned counsel for the petitioners in this case, are that on 06.03.2000 the opposite party no.3 is said to have executed an agreement to sale in favour of mother of the petitioners in respect of the property in dispute. However, after executing the said agreement in favour of mother of the petitioners, a sale deed in respect of the same property was executed by the opposite party no.3 in favour of opposite party no.4 on 21.07.2000. Thereafter, opposite party no.3 executed another sale deed in favour of one Ram Baran on 19.08.2000.

4. Since agreement to sale was dishonored, a suit for specific performance by the petitioners' mother was instituted on 11.12.2001 wherein the opposite party no.4, on an application, got himself