C. Shivappa, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the rejection of an application for impleading the proposed party as the additional party defendant in the suit. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the proposed party is both necessary and proper party to the suit, as he contributed for the cause of action.

2. In Duraiswami Goundan v. Subramanian Mudaliar, 1950 (I) M.L.J. 521, it was held thus:-

"In this case, however, it must be noted that the Government has not asked that it should be added as a party. It is the defendant who is compelling the plaintiff to make the Government a party and unless the court is satisfied that Government is a necessary party, ordinarily an order making Government a party should not be made. In Sri Mahant Prayaga Das Jee Varu v. The Board of Commissioners, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras, 1926 (51) M.L.J. 148, which was a suit filed by the head of the Hindu Religious institution against the Board of Commissioners for a declaration that the said Act was invalid and ultra vires and for an injunction restraining the defendant from doing certain acts, the Secretary of State for India in Council applied to be added as a party d