( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under Section 104 of the Civil procedure Code read with Order 43, Rule 1 (r) of the Civil procedure Code filed by the original defendant No. 1 in special Civil Suit No. 236 of 1993, which is still pending on the file of learned Civil Judge (S. D.), Ahmedabad (Rural), Mirjapur, at Ahmedabad challenging an order dated 24/2/1994 passed below application Ex. 5 in the aforesaid suit.

( 2 ) THE original defendant No. 1 is the appellant, while plaintiff and defendant Nos. 2 and 3 are the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 respectively (For the sake of convenience parties will be referred to hereinafter as the plaintiff and respective defendants.

( 3 ) THE facts leading to this Appeal from Order in a nutshell are as follows :- 3. 1on or about 29/7/1993, original plaintiff filed aforesaid Special Civil Suit No. 236 of 1993 against the defendant Nos. 1 to 3 mainly for following reliefs;[a] A decree of mandatory injunction directing defendant No. 2 to grant a necessary permission under Section 20 (1) (a) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (For short the "ulc Act") giving exemption to the suit land described in para-2 of the plaint from operation of Chapter-III of the said Act and also grant a permission to sell the suit land by defendant No. 1 to the plaintiff. [b] As an alternative prayer, plaintiff has prayed for a decree of mandatory injunction directing defendant No. 2 to take appropriate decision after giving an opportunity to the parties and the Commissioner, who may be appointed by the trial Court in the suit for the application under Section 20 of the Act, which is pending before the defendant No. 2 as admitted by defendant No. 2 in his letter No. UK/2080-700/15-V. 1 dated 20/4/1987. [c] For a decree for specific performance for the suit agreement dated 31/1/1978 executed by the defendant No. 1 in favour of the plaintiff with a further direction to defendant No. 1 to execute a final sale deed of the suit land in favour of the plaintiff by receiving a consideration of Rs. 3,15,650. 00- from the plaintiff and in case, if defendant No. 1 fails to execute a final sale deed, for appointment of Court Commissioner to execute the sale deed and get the sale registered for and on behalf of the trial Court. [d] In case, if the Court refuses to grant a decree for specific performance, then a money decree to recover Rs. 1,32,41,000. 00- with interest at the rate of 18% P. A. in favour of the plaintiff executable against the defendant No. 1. [e] For a perpetual prohibitory injunction restraining defendant No. 1 from transferring, selling or assigning the suit land by way of sale, mortgage, gift etc. to any third party and also from transferring the actual physical possession of the suit land to any third party. [f] For perpetual prohibitory injunction restraining defendant No. 1 from acting against the terms and conditions of agreement for sale dated 31/1/1978. [g] For perpetual prohibitory injunction restraining defendant No. 2 disposing the ULC application dated 30/4/1980 with a negative decision. 3. 2on the day on which the plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit, plaintiff also submitted an application ex. 5 for an interim injunction, pending the suit restraining defendant No. 1 from transferring, selling or assigning the suit land, which is described in para-2 of the application by way of sale, mortgage, gift etc. to any third party and also from transferring the physical possession of the suit land to any third party and also from acting against the terms and conditions of an agreement of sale-deed dated 31/7/1978. THE plaintiff also prayed for an interim injunction restraining defendant No. 2, pending the suit from disposing the ULC application dated 30/4/1980 with a negative decision. BY aforesaid application below Ex. 5, the plaintiff also prayed for an interim mandatory injunction directing the defendant No. 1 to initiate the proceedings before the defendant No. 2 for the provisions under the