FAO 16/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE A.K.GOEL HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIMA HAZARIKA ( Goel, J) This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 3.8.2011 of the trial cou rt on an application registered as Misc(J) No.145/2011 arising out of Title Sui t No.255/2011, under Order 38 Rule 5 read with Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Cod e of Civil Procedure. The suit is to recover the price of the goods supplied. Prayer in the application is for ad interim injunction against disbursement of payment due to the respondents/defendants for the works executed by them for the State of Assam. Learned trial court issued notice on the application on 3.8.2011 making it retu rnable on 8.8.2011. Aggrieved by denial of ad-interim injunction an appeal was filed by the appellant before the District Judge against the said order, but on receiving advice that such appeal was not maintainable, the same has been withdr awn and the present appeal has been filed in this Court. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the trial court should have grante d ex parte ad interim order of injunction to protect the right of the appella nt. Learned counsel for the defendants/respondents submits that there is no evidence whatsoever of delivery of goods or of defendants/respondents fraudulently are disposing their property to defeat the right of the appellant/plaintiff. In any case, since the matter is yet to be considered by the trial court, no interfere nce is called for by this Court. Learned counsel for the respondents has submit ted that written statement will be filed before the next date fixed by the trial court i.e. 31.10.2011. After due consideration of rival submissions, we do not find any ground to inter fere with the impugned order at this stage. In absence of any material to show d elivery of goods, we do are unable to hold that prima facie case is made out in favour of the appellant. However, we may not be treated to have expressed any fi nal view in the matter as the trial court has yet to go into the merits. The trial court will be at liberty to pass appropriate orders after considering rival claims of the parties. The appeal is dismissed.