Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 1,10(2)

  Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---O. I, r. 10 (2)-Applic ability-Discretion allowed to Court has to be exercised judicially so as not to cause inconvenience or embarrassment to parties Test of applicability of sub-rule is whether the relief claimed by plaintiff will directly affect intervenor.   Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)----O. I, r. 10 (2) "Proper party" and "necessary party"-Distinction.   Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)----O. I, r. 10 (2) Expression "questions involved in suit"-Means questions with regard to right set up and relief claimed on one side and denied or withheld on the other.   Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)----O. I, r. 10 (2) read with S. 151-Joinder of parties-Surety's suit for recovery of money paid to third party-Such third party not a proper or necessary parry to suit.   Mukhi Jeramdas Jethananak and others v. Tikamal Mulchand and another A I R 1935 Sind 194 ;.Vaithelinga Pandara Sannidhi Anddhina Karthar Tiruvaduthurai Adhinam v. Sadasiva Iyer and others A I R 1926 Mad. 836; Anjaneya Sastri v. Kothadapani Chettiar and others A I R 1936 Mad. 449 and Vanjiappa Goundan v. N. P. Y. L. R. Annamalai Chattiar and others A I R 1940 Mad. 69 ref.   Date of hearing: 11th March 1965.   JUDGMENT   Reasons for and the circumstances under which the present application under Order I, rule 10 read with section 151, C. P. C. is filed for joinder of K. P. T. as defendant appear to be relevant and necessary for disposal of this application and these; as briefly stated, are as follows:-   Plaintiff (National Bank of Pakistan) had, at the request made by the defendant (Syed Muzammal Hussain, proprietor of Seigfried Beacon (Pakistan) Karachi stood surety for the per formance of the contract which this defendant-firm had entered into with the Karachi Port Trust for re rolling of Mild Steel Scrap into M. S. Round Bars, and had given such guarantee to the Karachi Port Trust on various dates in the sums of Rs. 25,000, Rs. 25,000 and Rs. 30,000. In view- of this position, defendant had deposited with the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 43,000 only as margin "in order to meet any…