ARUN BHANSALI, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. With the consent of the parties, the matter has been finally heard.

3. The appellant is aggrieved against the rejection of his application under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 & 2, CPC, whereby his prayer to restrain the respondents Pawan Kumar, Mohd. Khijar Khan and Smt. Samim Ara from raising construction on the suit land and to maintain status quo was rejected holding that the plaintiff-appellant had no prima facie case in his favour.

4. Brief facts are that the plaintiff had filed a suit on 2-3-2007 seeking specific performance of contract dated 18-2-2006. However, during the pendency of the suit, a part of the suit property was sold to the three respondents and when they started raising construction on the suit property the application seeking temporary injunction was filed, which was opposed by the said purchasers inter alia on the ground that they were bona fide purchasers and the plaintiff has no right in the property as he had failed to perform his part of the contract entered into between him and his mother. The mother being absolute owner of the property and had right, title and interest in the property to transfe