[2025:RJ-JP:48842] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 4887/2025 1. Faizan @ Ajharuddin S/o Shri Badruddin, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Khadi Bhandar Road, Kali Paltan, Tonk, Tehsil And District Tonk (Rajasthan). 2. Riyajuddin S/o Shri Badruddin, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Khadi Bhandar Road, Kali Paltan, Tonk, Tehsil And District Tonk (Rajasthan). 3. Aijajuddin S/o Shri Badruddin, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Khadi Bhandar Road, Kali Paltan, Tonk, Tehsil And District Tonk (Rajasthan). , 4. Fayja Ansari D/o Shri Badruddin, Aged About 31 Years, R/ o Khadi Bhandar Road, Kali Paltan, Tonk, Tehsil And District Tonk (Rajasthan). 5. Shumaila D/o Shri Badruddin, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Khadi Bhandar Road, Kali Paltan, Tonk, Tehsil And District Tonk (Rajasthan). 6. Farha Naz Ansari W/o Iqbal Ahmed D/o Shri Badruddin, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Gali Ansariyan, Kali Paltan, Tonk (Rajasthan). 7. Yasmin Bano W/o Shri Mehfooj Ahmed D/o Shri Badruddin, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Gali Ansariyan, Kali Paltan, Tonk (Rajasthan). ----Appellants Versus 1. Mehboob Ali S/o Shri Mehmood Ali, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Mehandi Bag, Tonk, Present R/o Mehboob Colony, Mahadevali, Tonk, Tehsil And District Tonk (Rajasthan). 2. Shoaib @ Jed Ali S/o Mehboob, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Mehboob Colony, Mahadevali, Tonk, Tehsil And District Tonk (Rajasthan). 3. Nagar Parishad, Tonk Through Commissioner. ----Respondents [2025:RJ-JP:48842] (2 of 3) [CMA-4887/2025] For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sandeep Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Praveen Kumar Jain for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA Order 02/12/2025 At the request of learned counsel for the appellants, service on respondent No. 3 is dispensed with at his risk and cost. For respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Sh. Praveen Kumar Jain is appearing, thus, service is complete. With the consent of both the parties, matter is finally heard. This present appeal has been filed by the plaintiff-appellants assailing the order dated 06.10.2025, whereby no prima facie case, balance of convenience as well as irreparable loss was found by the trial Court and thus, the temporary injunction application was rejected. Without joining the issues on merits, learned counsel for the appellant submits, that he would be satisfied, if a direction is issued to the respondent that in case he enters into any agreement to sale or sale deed, then the factum of the pendency of the present suit will be disclosed by him in the agreement to sale or in the sale deed as the case may be. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection, if the aforesaid direction is issued. The present civil miscellaneous appeal is disposed of with the direction that in case the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 enters into any agreement to sale or sale deed, then the factum of the present suit would be disclosed by them, in the agreement to sale or sale deed. [2025:RJ-JP:48842] (3 of 3) [CMA-4887/2025] With the above observations, the present miscellaneous appeal stands disposed of. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (BIPIN GUPTA),J PARSHANT /9