Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.—In both these Miscellaneous Appeals identical issues arise on practically the same set of facts and therefore with the consent of the parties the matters have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order at the stage of admission itself.

2. M.A.No. 38/04 is directed against the order dated 24.11.2003 passed by the 1st Sub-Judge, Danapur in Title Suit No.24 of 2003 by which he has allowed the petition dated 17.04.2003 filed by the plaintiffs-respondents 1st Set under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and directed that the defendants/appellants shall not make attempt to dispossess the plaintiffs from the disputed land till the disposal of the suit.

3. M.A.No.39 of 2004 is also directed against the order dated 24.11.2003 passed in Title Suit No.19 of 2003 by which also a petition dated 17.4.2003 under the same provisions has been allowed in the same terms.

4. The defendants/appellants and the defendants/respondents II set Nos.3 to 5 are common in both the appeals.

5. Both the suits had been filed by the plaintiffs/respondents Nos. 1 and 2 in the respective appeals for a direction upon the d