M.M. Sundresh J.

1. The appellants are the plaintiffs in the suit. The suit had been filed for the specific performance in C.S.No.809 of 2010 against the defendants 1 to 3. Pending the suit, the fourth respondent herein filed an application in Application No.5678 of 2011 seeking to implead himself as a party defendant alleging that he is an agreement holder in the suit property. The learned single Judge allowed the application and hence, the present appeal before us.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that in a suit for specific performance, the appellants being the plaintiffs are the dominus litis, and hence, it is for them to choose a party defendant. The fourth respondent is neither a necessary party nor a proper party for deciding the issues involved in the suit. The agreement entered into between the defendants 1 to 3 and the fourth defendant is a subsequent one. There cannot be any possession in pursuant to the part performance without registration of the alleged agreement as required under Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act. The fourth respondent cannot agitate his rights in a suit for specific performance filed by the appellants