Back
2024 Supreme(Guj) 2275
N THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J. C. DOSHI, J.
Red Chillies Entertainment Private Limited And Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
Late Mustak Ahmed Abdul Latif Sheikh And Ors. – Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 11687 Of 2022
Decided On : 10-07-2024
For The Petitioner: Mr Salil M Thakore
The right to sue for damages in a defamation case is a personal right that does not survive the plaintiff's death. Unless a decree exists, the cause of action extinguishes upon the claimant's death, and thus legal heirs cannot be substituted to continue the litigation.
Headnote:(A) Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Section 306 - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order 22 Rule 1 - Defamation suit - Survival of right to sue - The maxim 'actio personalis moritur cum persona' (a personal action dies with the person) applies to actions in tort such as defamation. Under the statute, the right to prosecute or defend an action for defamation does not survive in favor of the legal representatives of a deceased plaintiff, as the cause of action is inherently personal in nature. (Paras 10, 16, 17, 18).
(B) Legal substitution of heirs - Maintainability - When a suit for damages due to defamation is pending and the original plaintiff dies, the legal heirs cannot be substituted because the cause of action does not survive. This principle differs only where the suit has already resulted in a decree, as the original cause of action merges into the decretal debt, which becomes part of the estate. (Paras 7, 17, 18).
Facts of the case:
A civil suit claiming significant damages for defamation was filed against the creators of a film, alleging that promotional materials and the film caused severe reputational harm. The original plaintiff passed away during the pendency of the proceedings. The trial court allowed the legal heirs of the deceased to be brought on record, which the defendants challenged by way of a revision petition.
Findings of Court:
The court determined that the trial court committed a jurisdictional error by permitting the substitution of legal heirs. The right to sue for defamation is personal, and because no decree had been passed during the plaintiff's lifetime, the cause of action extinguished upon death. Consequently, the proceedings cannot be continued by the successors.
Issues: Whether the right to sue for unliquidated damages in a defamation suit survives the death of the plaintiff, and whether his legal heirs are eligible for substitution to continue the proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: By applying the legal maxim 'actio personalis moritur cum persona' and interpreting the relevant provisions of the succession law, the court held that a cause of action for defamation does not survive to legal representatives. As the right to sue essentially dies with the person, the request for substitution of heirs must be denied and the suit must abate.
Result: Petition allowed; the impugned orders permitting the substitution of legal heirs are quashed and set aside; the trial court is directed to pass orders for the abatement of the suit.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual and procedural background of the defamation suit. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 9) |
| 2. right to sue for personal defamation abates upon plaintiff's death. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. interpretation of section 306 regarding defamation as a non-heritable personal action. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. the maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona prevents inheritance of defamation claims. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. the court orders the abatement of the suit due to non-survival of the right to sue. (Para 20) |
JUDGMENT :
J. C. DOSHI, J.
1. A short but interesting question is involved in this petition that in case of defamation whether right to sue survives for the heirs of the plaintiff.
2. From the pleadings of the petition, the necessary facts are gathered as under :
2.1 It is the case of the plaintiff that his father viz. late Abdul Latif Abdul Wahab Sheikh has earned reputation for himself and his family. He was engaged in various businesses and he was well known in society. He also contested election for Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation in 1986. Thereafter, said Abdul Latif Abdul Wahab died. In October, 2013, the film ‘Raees’ was announced. The plaintiff filed Civil Suit No.782 of 2016 for defamation against petitioner-defendant praying for decree of damages of Rs.101 Crores. On 06.07.2020, the original plaintiff expired. The heirs of plaintiff filed Chamber Summons at Exhibit-67 & 68 and 85 & 86. Learned City Civil Court vide order dated 27.04.2022 allowed the chamber summons at Exhibits-67 & 68 and 85 & 86. Hence, the present petition.
3. What could be discerned from perusal of the fact that Late Mr.Mustak Ahmed Abdul Latif Sheikh has filed Civil Suit No.782 of 2016 claiming following reliefs :
“(A) The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare that, the promotional material, previews, and promos of the film 'Raees' either written, directed and / or acted and produced by the defendants are defematory to the reputation of the plaintiff, his family and also to the highly preserved reputation of late Abdul Latif Abdul Wahab Sheikh who is the father of the plaintiff.
(B) Further the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare that, such acts of the defendants are also defamatory in nature and all those release of news items by the defendants for the promotion of the film 'Raees' and the other promotional material, promos and trailers made available by the defendants on social media, etc. have caused and it can cause heavy loss and damages to the plaintiff. The Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to declare that, the release and / or screening of the film named 'Raees' written, directed, acted and produced by the defendants would be their willful and tortuous act and it may be further declared that, such act of production of the film undertaken by the defendants is in conspiracy with each other, and with the malafide intentions on their part only with a view to disrepute the plaintiff and to defame the plaintiff, his family and highly preserved reputation of late father of the plaintiff.
(C) This Hon'ble Court may be further please to pass an appropriate decree for compensation to the damages of the reputation of the plaintiff and preserved reputation of late Abdul Latif, to the tune of Rupees 101 Crores together with running interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of the suit till the realization of the amounts from the defendants. It may be further declare that, the defendants shall remain liable to the plaintiff as joint and severally. The Hon'ble Court may be further please to mould such decree in a way that the decreetal dues can be recovered from all kind of properties and body personem of the defendants.
(D) The defendants, their marketing agents, distributors, and / or their power of attorney holders or anyone claiming right to release and screening and showing the promos, previews and trailers and or the entire film named 'Raees' be restrained by way issuance of permanent injunction and be directed and restrain
