PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

( 1 ) ON 10. 8. 2006 following issue was framed:-

"whether the suit is maintainable on account of the defence that the receipt-cum-undertaking dated 26. 12. 2005 is in the nature of an agreement to enter into an agreement to sell? Onus on parties. "

( 2 ) IA No. 5145/2006 is plaintiffs application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 seeking an interim injunction to restrain the defendants from selling or encumbering the suit land till disposal of the suit. IA No. 7050/2006 is defendants' application seeking recall of the ex-parte injunction granted on 5. 5. 2006.

( 3 ) SUIT seeks specific performance of an agreement dated 26. 12. 2005.

( 4 ) AS would be evident from the issue framed, question arises whether the document stated as an agreement to sell is an agreement to sell or is it in the nature of an agreement to enter into an agreement. To put it differently, did the parties conclude their bargain intending to enter into a legal relationship with each other when document dated 26. 12. 2005 was executed between plaintiff and defendant No. 2 who is the son of defendant no. 1 or whether parties contemplated that to bind them, a formal agreement to sell would be ente