Parasmal Chordia vs Rajalakshmi Ammal And Anr. on 7 November, 1968
5. The object of Order 8-A, Civil Procedure Code, is to prevent the same question being tried twice over, where ere is substantial question common as between the plaintiff and defendant in the action aid as between the defendant and a third person. In such a case, the third person is impleaded as a party to take part in the proceedings, so as to bind him by the decision, on the question that is raised. In all these cases, it has to be considered whether the plaintiff would be prejudiced in any way or delayed in his action impleading third parties. If the decision on the claim by the plaintiff is likely to be unduly prolonged and thereby there would be considerable delay in the plaintiff obtaining relief the Court would be hesitant to implead their pi-ties as parties to the suit. Under Order 8-A, Civil Procedure Code, a defendant, who claims to be entitled to contribution from or indemnity against any person not already a party to the suit may, by leave of the Court, issue notice to such a person. The Court shall exercise its discretion and decide whether this is a proper case in which third party procedure has to be resorted to. Mr. Ranganatha Sastri for the petitioner relied on the decision in Parasmal v. Rajalakshmi where it has been held that third party procedure is available in suits on negotiable instruments. It was observed that all that is necessary for the application of their party procedure is whether, if the plaintiff claim is allowed, the defendant has a claim in that event for indemnity, by reason of such claim being allowed, from a third party, and that, if the requisite is satisfied, the Court will be justified, on any extraneous ground from refusing third party procedure. The question as to prejudice to the plaintiff was neither raised nor considered in the decision cited and the observations cannot be read as the learned judge laying down that prejudice to the plaintiff is an extraneous ground.