GURMIT SINGH BHATIA versus KIRAN KANT ROBINSON AND OTHERS

GURMIT SINGH BHATIA versus KIRAN KANT ROBINSON AND OTHERS

Plaintiffs who filed suit for specific performance cannot be forced to implead a person against whom no relief is claimed, and who is not a party to the contract under litigation. Court must not enlarge suit scope or convert it into title and possession suit. The appellant, being a purchaser during pendency, is not a necessary party against plaintiffs' wish.

Parties
Appellant: Gurmit Singh Bhatia; Respondent: Kiran Kant Robinson; Respondent: Respondent No.1 (original defendant No.1); Respondent: Respondent Nos.2 & 3 (original plaintiffs)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal Against High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Impleadment of Parties, Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, Dominus Litis
Civil Procedure Specific Performance Impleadment of Parties Order 1 Rule 10 CPC Dominus Litis

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gurmit Singh Bhatia

Appellant

Kiran Kant Robinson

Respondent

Respondent No.1 (original defendant No.1)

Respondent

Respondent Nos.2 & 3 (original plaintiffs)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal Against High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs can be compelled to implead a person in the suit for specific performance against their wish, particularly when no relief is claimed against such person

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiffs who filed suit for specific performance cannot be forced to implead a person against whom no relief is claimed, and who is not a party to the contract under litigation. Court must not enlarge suit scope or convert it into title and possession suit. The appellant, being a purchaser during pendency, is not a necessary party against plaintiffs' wish.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appellant cannot be impleaded as defendant in suit for specific performance between original plaintiffs and original defendant no.1 against plaintiffs' wish.
  • No order as to costs.