1. - Appellant-plaintiff by the instant appeal has called in question the impugned order dated 23rd of March 2013, passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Dungarpur, whereby the application of the appellant under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 CPC for temporary injunction was rejected.

2. Succinctly stated, facts of the case are that the appellant laid a suit for specific performance of contract before the learned trial Court against the respondent with the averment that there was an agreement to sale between the rival parties for the disputed plot. Alongwith the suit for specific performance of contract, the appellant also preferred an application under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 CPC seeking interim relief of restraining the respondent from alienating the plot and to maintain status quo regarding plot in dispute. Learned trial Court, after hearing the rival parties, by the impugned order declined the relief of temporary injunction.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Bheem Arora has argued that in a suit for specific performance of contract further alienation of the property can create many complications and further any alteration in the property can complicate the situat