SANJIB BANERJEE, J.

1. In this seemingly David and Goliath standoff, iron and steel baron Laxmi Niwas Mittal complains of being needlessly impleaded in a frivolous action and insists that he should be relieved of being detained till the trial by the plaint pertaining to the suit being rejected as against him. The appeal is directed against the dismissal of the first defendant's application in such regard.

2. The principal contention of the first defendant appellant is that only an illusion of a cause of action has been spun against him in the plaint; and, that a meaningful reading of the drudgery spread over nearly hundred pages, would not reveal any legal cause having been espoused against him. The appellant asserts that a 1996 oral agreement that he is alleged to have entered into with the second plaintiff brother-in-law is downright fanciful and imaginary; and, even if it is taken at face value, the subsequent agreements as pleaded in the plaint and as evident from the documents pertaining thereto would destroy the edifice of the claim against him. The appellant says that though a maze of allegations has been stitched to rope in the appellant, the plaint does not disclos