Mumbai International Airport v. Regency Convention

Core idea: In a suit for specific performance between A and B, a third party cannot be added unless the decree would be ineffective without them or they have a direct legal interest in the contract property. Here, the airport operator had no right, title, or interest in the disputed plot (it wasn’t leased to it). So, it was not a necessary or proper party.

• Is the appellant a necessary or proper party to the buyer’s suit for specific performance?

• Necessary party: Without whom no effective decree can be passed.
• Proper party: Whose presence helps completely decide the dispute.
• Specific performance suits: Third parties who claim no relief and have no enforceable right in the contract property are not necessary/proper parties.

The Supreme Court held the appellant was neither purchaser nor lessee of the suit property and had no enforceable interest in it. The airport lease gave it functions over demised areas only; it cannot claim rights over land not leased. Hence, it is not a necessary or proper party in the specific performance suit. Appeal dismissed.

• In specific performance, the dispute is between contracting parties; outsiders join only if an effective decree needs them.
• Mere operational control of a larger complex ≠ legal interest in a separate, excluded parcel.

Prevents overcrowding of specific performance suits with parties who have no direct stake, saving time and keeping focus on the contract.

• No right/title/interest in the suit property → no impleadment.
• Operational role over larger area ≠ interest in excluded land.
• Specific performance remains an inter partes remedy.

Mnemonic: R-T-I → JOIN?

1. Do they have Right/Title/Interest in the suit land?
2. If no → they are out.
3. If yes → ask if decree is ineffective without them.

Issue: Is the airport operator a necessary/proper party in a specific performance suit over a plot it does not hold?

Rule: Only parties essential for an effective decree—or with a direct legal interest—may be impleaded.

Application: The disputed plot was not leased to the operator; no right/title/interest; decree effective without it.

Conclusion: Not a necessary/proper party; impleadment refused; appeal dismissed.

Specific Performance

A decree ordering a party to perform a contract (usually for immovable property).

Necessary Party

A person without whom no effective order can be made.

Proper Party

A person whose presence helps in fully resolving the dispute.