The appeal is filed against that portion of the common order allowing I.A. No. IV filed by respondent, who was the defendant before the Trial Court.

2. Sri H.S Dwarakanath, appearing for the appellant, would contend that the appellant is the plaintiff before the Trial Court. The plaintiff claims that he has put up structures over the suit land. The defendants sought to interfere with his possession and sought to demolish the structures and it is in this circumstances that the suit was filed along with I.A. No. II seeking an order of injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with his possession and I.A. No. III restraining them from demolishing the structures in the suit property. Respondent 2, who claimed as an agreement holder, to purchase a portion of the suit property, had, in turn, filed an application numbered as I.A. No. IV seeking a restraint against the appellant from putting up construction. The Trial Court granted both the applications in favour of the plaintiff, restraining the defendants from interfering with his possession and from demolishing the structures. However, the plaintiff was also restrained from carrying on with any construction activi