1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2772/2009. Pargat Singh. VERSUS Bhurji and Others. 01.04.2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Mr.Gajendra Singh Rathore, for the petitioner. Mr.Ajay Goyal, for the respondents. ***** Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is plaintiff who has challenged the order passed by the learned appellate court by which the appeal, against the order of the learned trial court allowing the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C., has partly been allowed. The learned trial court passed an order of injunction which is Annexure-3 on record restraining the defendants No.1 and 2 from alienating the property in dispute. The defendants preferred an appeal and the learned appellate court accepted the case set up by the plaintiff so far as the defendant No.1 Bhurji is concerned that prima facie there was an agreement for sale of the land in dispute executed by Bhurji. However, so far as the case against the defendant No.2 Heera is concerned since admittedly the plaintiff 2 himself has accepted the fact that there was an oral consent given by Heera but his signature do not find place in the said agreement, the learned appellate court has allowed the appeal to the extent of defendant No.2 Heera. In the facts and circumstances, therefore, I find that the learned lower appellate court has not committed any jurisdictional error in allowing the appeal partly. In the facts and circumstances, the writ petition stands dismissed as there is no jurisdictional error committed by the learned appellate court. It is, however, made clear that in case any sale does take place of the share of the defendant No.2 Heera, the same shall be subject to the outcome of the suit. (DALIP SINGH),J. Solanki DS, Jr.P.A.