[2025:RJ-JP:51123] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19439/2025 1. Smt. Kamla Wife Of Late Sh. Ramswaroop Meena, Aged About 90 Years, Resident Of Dholi Kothi, Gram Todi Ramjanipura, Ramnagariya Road, Jagatpura, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur, Rajasthan Prant. 2. Chhagan Lal Son Of Late Sh. Ramswaroop Meena, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Dholi Kothi, Gram Todi Ramjanipura, Ramnagariya Road, Jagatpura, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur, Rajasthan Prant. ----Petitioners Versus 1. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Through Sahayak Abhiyanta, F-5, Jagatpura, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Gheesi Devi Meena Wife Of Shri Badrinarayan Meena, Resident Of Upla Darwano Ki Dhan, Gram Natata, Tehsil Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur, Rajasthan Prant. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gulab Chand Meena For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA Judgment / Order 18/12/2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed assailing the order dated 01.11.2025, passed by learned Additional Civil Judge No. 17, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, District Sanganer, whereby the application filed by the plaintiff-petitioners under Order XXXIX Rule 7 read with Section 151 of the CPC, was dismissed. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the plaintiffs-petitioners filed a suit against the defendants- respondents for permanent injunction along with an application for temporary injunction. During the pendency of the temporary injunction application the plaintiffs-petitioners filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 7 of CPC, which came to be dismissed by order dated 01.11.2025. [2025:RJ-JP:51123] (2 of 2) [CW-19439/2025] 3. Hence, the present civil writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned trial court has wrongly rejected the application vide order dated 01.11.2025. He further submits that on their application for temporary injunction, an ad-interim order has already been passed restraining the respondents from disconnecting the electricity connection. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be allowed and order dated 01.11.2025 may be quashed and set aside. 5. Heard. 6. Perused the material available on record. 7. Upon consideration of the material available on record, this Court finds that the learned trial court rightly rejected the application. The application filed by the plaintiffs–petitioners was intended to collect evidence, which is impermissible, as an application cannot be used as a tool for evidence gathering. Moreover, considering that in the suit relief by way of permanent injunction seeking restrain order from disconnecting the electricity connection, this Court finds that no site inspection is warranted. 8. In view of the above, the present writ petition stands dismissed and the order dated 01.11.2025, passed by learned Additional Civil Judge No. 17, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, District Sanganer, is upheld. 9. The present writ petition stands disposed of. 10. All pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (BIPIN GUPTA),J PARSHANT /2