Right To Sue For Malicious Prosecution Is Personal Injury, Cannot Be Enforced By Person's Legal Heirs: J&K High Court

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar clarified that the cause of action for damages for malicious prosecution is a right to sue or defend which falls within the parameters of personal injuries therefore, such a right cannot be enforced by a person against legal representatives of the person who is responsible for lodging malicious prosecution against such person.

The case involved an appeal against a judgment passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Jammu, where the plaintiff was awarded a compensation of Rs. 2 lacs for malicious prosecution. Both the plaintiff and the defendant passed away during the pendency of the appeal, and their legal heirs were brought on record.

The legal heirs of the original defendant (now the appellant) argued that the compensation cannot be enforced against them as the right to sue for malicious prosecution is personal to the plaintiff and doesn't survive the death of either party. The legal heirs of the plaintiff (respondent) did not appear before the court.

Referencing Section 306 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, which delineates the survival of rights and actions after the death of a party Justice Dhar highlighted the exclusion of causes of action for defamation, assault, and other personal injuries from surviving the death of the party.

Emphasising that damages for malicious prosecution fall within the ambit of personal injuries, the court held that such rights cannot be enforced against the legal representatives of the accused party.

“..All rights to prosecute or defend any action in favour of or against a person, at time of his death, survive to and against his legal representatives except causes of action for defamation, assault or other personal injuries not causing the death of the party, meaning thereby that causes of action for defamation and personal injuries do not survive after the death of the person in whose favour or against whom the said cause of action had arisen”, the bench remarked.

To fortify its stand the court then cited the case of Imranuddin Khan and others vs Waris Imam (2008) from the Patna High Court, where a similar suit for malicious prosecution was held to be a personal right that dies with the person.

Based on the aforementioned legal provisions and past rulings, the judgment awarding compensation was set aside to the extent of the deceased appellant. The court further held that since the action for damages is personal, the appeal filed by the deceased plaintiff's legal heirs seeking enhanced compensation also abated due to their predecessor's death.

Case Title: Krishan Gupta and others Vs D. D. Sadhotra and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 78

Mr. Sanjeev Padha, Advocate represented the appellants

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment