B P NANDY Vs. GENERAL MANAGER EAST INDIA RLY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A preliminary point of some interest has been taken in this appeal which, in my view, should succeed.

(2.) The appellant is one B. P. Nandy, who was admittedly a contractor under respondent No. 1, the General Manager, East Indian Railway. There was a workman, named Apal Ram, who is respondent No. 2 before us, employed under the appellant and engaged in work which the appellant was doing for the respondent Railway under a contract with that body. The respondent No. 2 suffered a personal injury by accident and claimed compensation from respondent No. 1, the Railway. Thereafter, at the prayer of the Railway, the appellant was brought on the record so that in the event of the workman's claim being allowed an order for indemnity could be passed in his presence under Sub-section (2) of Section 12, if such an order could be passed on the facts of the case.

(3.) The workman's claim succeeded and the operative portion of the Commissioner's order is in the following terms :