1. Although initially the application for stay being GA 1 of 2025 was slated to be heard, yet since all the papers that were there before the learned Single Judge are there before us, by consent of the parties we have heard the appeal itself.

2. The defendant nos. 3, 5 and 6 in the suit being CS 35 of 2025 have preferred the instant appeal laying challenge to a judgment and order dated March 20, 2025, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in GA 1 of 2025 arising out of CS 35 of 2025, thereby granting an ex parte ad interim order of injunction restraining the defendants in the suit (i.e. the appellants and the proforma respondents) inter alia from carrying on any further construction at or alienating or transferring or disposing of the suit property to any third party.

3. Since the appeal is directed against an ex parte ad interim order of injunction passed in a suit, in view of the law as it stands today, the Court should, at this stage, proceed on the assumption that all the averments made in the plaint and in the application for injunction are true. The case run in the plaint therefore needs to be noticed first. Briefly summed up, the plaint case is as follows:-

(a) The