1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 15.07.2004. The order is in two parts, in the first part of the order, the application submitted by the respondent No.5-RIICo. under Order 7 Rule 11, C.P.C. for dismissal of the suit, has been dismissed. Thereafter, the learned trial Court has proceeded to state on the basis of the objections raised by the defendant No.5 that the defendant Nos.1 to 4 are not necessary parties, as they have no connection with the property in dispute.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid objections, the learned trial Court has deleted the names of the defendant Nos.1 to 4 from the array of the parties in the suit.

4. Against the aforesaid part of the order deleting the names of the respondent Nos.1 to 4 from the array of the parties, the plaintiff-petitioner has filed this writ petition.

5. The application under Order 7 Rule 11, C.P.C. submitted by the RIICo. (defendant No.5) was dismissed and that order has not been challenged by the RIICo. (defendant No.5).

6. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the plaintiff had filed the suit for injunction in which it was averred