Whether the right to sue for damages for malicious prosecution/defamation survives to legal representatives when the plaintiff dies after remand and before any subsisting decree exists. [Paras 5–6]

advocatemmmohan

Malicious prosecution / Defamation — Survival of cause of action — Death of plaintiff — Abatement

Suit for recovery of damages for malicious prosecution/harassment/defamation — Plaintiff died during pendency of proceedings after First Appellate Court set aside trial court decree and remanded suit — On date of death, no subsisting decree in favour of plaintiff — Cause of action being personal does not survive — Suit and pending appeal abate.
[Paras 6–8]

---

Indian Succession Act, 1925 — S.306 — Personal causes of action — Effect

Right to sue for damages for defamation or malicious prosecution is personal — Unless merged into a decree, such right does not form part of estate — Legal representatives cannot be substituted where plaintiff dies before crystallisation of decree.
[Paras 6–7]

---

Civil Procedure — Effect of remand — Status of decree

Where First Appellate Court sets aside trial court decree and remands suit — Earlier decree ceases to exist — Suit deemed pending before Trial Court — No accrued or vested right survives in favour of plaintiff’s estate.
[Paras 6–7]

---

Precedent — Melepurath Sankunni Ezhuthassan v. Thekittil Gopalankutty Nair, (1986) 1 SCC 118 — Application

Distinction reaffirmed between:
(i) death after decree in favour of plaintiff (right survives), and
(ii) death when suit/appeal pending without decree (right abates) — Present case falls in latter category.
[Paras 6–7]

---

Impleadment of legal representatives — Non-maintainability

Where cause of action abates on death of plaintiff, applications for impleadment of legal representatives are not maintainable.
[Para 8]

---

ANALYSIS OF LAW AND FACTS

1. Nature of Proceedings

The appeal was directed against the judgment of the First Appellate Court which had set aside the decree of the Trial Court granting ₹1 lakh as damages for malicious prosecution/defamation and remanded the suit for fresh decision.
[Paras 1–2, 4]

---

2. Plaintiff’s Claim

The plaintiff, a former Sarpanch, pleaded that the defendants had lodged a false criminal complaint involving serious offences, leading to incarceration, prolonged trial, and eventual acquittal, thereby causing loss of reputation and harassment, for which damages of ₹1 lakh were claimed.
[Paras 1–2]

---

3. Procedural History Material to Abatement

• Trial Court decreed the suit on 30-11-2009.

• First Appellate Court set aside the decree and remanded the suit by order dated 21-11-2013.

• No stay of the remand order was operating.

• Plaintiff died on 20-06-2018, when the suit stood pending before the Trial Court.
  [Paras 4–6]

---

4. Core Legal Issue

Whether the right to sue for damages for malicious prosecution/defamation survives to legal representatives when the plaintiff dies after remand and before any subsisting decree exists.
[Paras 5–6]

---

5. Application of Supreme Court Law

The Court applied the binding ratio in Melepurath Sankunni Ezhuthassan v. Thekittil Gopalankutty Nair, holding that:

• If plaintiff dies when only the right to sue exists, the action abates;

• If plaintiff dies after a decree in his favour, the decretal amount forms part of estate and survives.

Since the earlier decree had been set aside, the present case squarely fell in the first category.
[Paras 6–7]

---

6. Nature of Cause of Action

The Court held that claims for malicious prosecution and defamation are personal torts. In absence of a subsisting decree, such claims do not become heritable property and do not survive to legal representatives.
[Paras 6–8]

---

7. Consequence of Death

On the date of death:

• no decree existed,

• suit was pending before Trial Court, and

• cause of action was purely personal.

Accordingly, the suit abated, and the Second Appeal against Order also abated.
[Paras 7–8]

---

8. Impleadment Applications

Applications seeking to bring legal representatives on record were dismissed as not maintainable, abatement being automatic in law.
[Para 8]

---

9. Final Holding

• Appeal dismissed as abated.

• Suit held to have abated.

• Applications for impleadment dismissed.
  [Para 8]

---

Ratio Decidendi

A claim for damages for malicious prosecution or defamation is a personal cause of action. Where the plaintiff dies after a remand and before any decree in his favour subsists, the right to sue does not survive to legal representatives, and the suit as well as the pending appeal abate.