IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. ORDER 4.2.2008. S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.257/2008 Rajendra Bansal & Anr. Vs. Bharat Kumar Garg & Ors. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Shri N.K. Maloo, for the appellants. Shri Jitendra Pandey, for the respondent No.1. The matter comes up on the application No.2622 dated 29.1.2008 filed by the appellant under Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C. for taking the additional evidence on record. The aforesaid document/evidence pertains to an alleged agreement dated 15.3.2007 and power of attorney executed on the same date in favour of Smt. Prem Bai mother of respondent No.1. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the learned trial court has decided the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. primarily on the ground that there was a prior agreement dated 20.8.2006 in favour of the purchaser respondent No.1 executed by the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and as such the agreement entered into with the plaintiff on 7.9.2006 being subsequent there is no prima facie case in favour of the plaintiff. Learned counsel for the appellant on the basis of subsequent evidence which the plaintiff appellant has gathered has sought to contented that the order passed by the learned trial court based upon the existence of the prior agreement is falsified and is required to be set aside. In view of the facts which have come to the knowledge of the plaintiff appellant after the impugned order dated 8.1.2008 was passed and which were not within the knowledge of the plaintiff at the time when the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 was heard and decided, I deem it just and proper to permit the plaintiff appellant, that if so advised he may prefer a review petition or a fresh application for grant of temporary injunction on the changed circumstances based upon the facts which have come to light, as claimed by the appellant, after the learned trial court's decision dated 08.01.2008. In the light of the above the appeal is disposed of with liberty to the plaintiff appellant to file a review petition before the learned trial court or a fresh application for grant of temporary injunction on the changed set of circumstances. This order shall not amount to expression of any opinion so far as the merits of the case are concerned and it is expected that the learned trial court shall hear and decide the application so filed by the plaintiff appellant in accordance with law taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case. The appeal, stay application and the application under Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C. are disposed of as above. (DALIP SINGH),J. Ramchandrkhatri,PS