Magnitude/phase vs real/imaginary
Both the plots are same.
Magnitude/Phase plot is observed from Real/Imaginary plot.
Magnitude is obtained from Real and Imaginary components
Phase is angle of Real/Imaginary point.
Phase conveys the information related to delay.

I agree but my question is, what inference I can draw by looking at a re/im plot? I have looked at a few plots and I cant make much sense out of it. Magnitude/Phase is a different story

I agree but my question is, what inference I can draw by looking at a re/im plot?
Usually I infer that I wish the author of the plot had used magnitude/phase.

Not much, I will leave rectangular form for computations. I and you as "human GUI" will look at amplitude/phase.
for single tone you can infer some conclusions
You have received a lot of similar inputs. Here is one that has a slightly different take that may be helpful in your thought process:
Consider the real part as a cosine wave. Then the imaginary part would correspond to a sine wave. With reference to the calculus, the imaginary part can be viewed as the rate of change of the real part. Of course, cosine^2 + sine^2 = 1 for the magnitude viewpoint and the angle is jut the arctangent function.
ok. Thanks. One follow-up question. Why is that we don't usually see plots of complex value directly. For example, if the following is the complex array:
3+2j, 2+3j, 1+4j, ... then I can simply plot value (3,2) (2,3) (1,4) as a 2 dimensional plot (x,y dimensions)?

you can plot Re/Im separately or one against the other but plotting both values as pair against time requires 3D and is pointless.

There most certainly are plots of complex-valued sequences. But as kaz said, such plots must be in three dimensions. Such a plot can be found as the blue curve in Figure 4 at:
https://www.dsprelated.com/showarticle/51.php
Here are a couple of 3-D plots:








