JUDGMENT

1. The Court : The defendant no.2 seeks deletion of its name from the array of parties in the suit by the present application.

2. Learned senior advocate appearing for the defendant no.2 submits that, no part of cause of action as against the defendant no.2 arose within the jurisdiction of this Honble Court. He submits that, the plaint does not contain any pleading establishing any part of the cause of action as against the defendant No. 2 to have arisen within the jurisdiction of this Honble Court. In support of the contention that, when no part of the cause of action against the defendant arises within the jurisdiction of a Court in seisin of proceeding, such defendant cannot be a party in such suit, he relies upon (1999) 1 Cal LJ 68 page 401 (Steel Authority of India Ltd. vs. Messrs Stanimpex & Ors.) and ILR VOL. XLIX (Calcutta) 895 (Bengal And North Western Railway Co. Ltd. vs. Sadaram Bhairodan). According to him, the pleadings in the written statement cannot be looked into for the purpose of considering whether or not the Court has jurisdiction. In support of the contention that, pleadings in the written statement cannot be considered in an application of this nature,