In Brief
The case concerns whether a third party who purchases property during the pendency of a specific performance suit can be forcibly impleaded as a defendant against the original plaintiffs' wishes. The appellant had purchased the property under a sale deed from the vendor (defendant) while the suit was ongoing, and sought to be joined as a defendant. The Supreme Court held that the plaintiff is dominus litis (master of the suit) and cannot be compelled to implead a party not signatory to the original contract without consent, as this would impermissibly convert a suit for specific performance into one for title and possession. The Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court's decision."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.