In Eclair Advisor Ltd. v. Jindo America, Inc. (39 AD3d 240 [1st Dept 2007]), the First Department explains the purpose behind the statute: . . . "joinder rules serve an important policy interest in guaranteeing that absent parties at risk of prejudice will not be 'embarrassed by judgments purporting to bind their rights or interests where they have had no opportunity to be heard,'" and they "also protect against multiple lawsuits and inconsistent judgments" . . . see also Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce, Inc. v. Pataki, 100 N.Y.2d 801, 820 [2003] ["there are two principal purposes of requiring dismissal owing to the absence of an indispensable party. First, mandatory joinder prevents multiple, inconsistent judgments relating to the same controversy. Second, joinder protects the otherwise absent parties who would be 'embarrassed by judgments purporting to bind their rights or interests where they have had no opportunity to be heard'"]). (Eclair Advisor Ltd. v. Jindo America, Inc. at 244-245.)