SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J

1. The appellant/plaintiff has filed the present appeal impugning the order dated 06.02.2015 whereby defendant No.7 has been deleted from the array of parties, on the ground that as no relief has been sought against the defendant No.7, he is not a necessary party.

2. The appellant/plaintiff has filed the present suit seeking a decree in the sum of Rs. 3,50,00,000/- as against the defendant Nos.1 to 6. No relief has been sought against the defendant No.7 in the plaint. It is the contention of the appellant that the defendant No.7, if not a necessary party, is at least a proper party and has been correctly impleaded in the suit and, as such, the defendant No.7 could not have been deleted from the array of parties.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the presence of the defendant No.7 is necessary as the appellant/plaintiff wants to cross-examine the defendant No.7. It is contended that the defendant No.7 has an important role to play in the suit and the transactions between the plaintiff and the defendant Nos.1 to 6 and, as such, the presence of the defendant No.7 is necessary. It is contended that if the defendant No.7 was not contin