SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1951 Supreme(Nagpur) 44

DEO
BABOOLAL NANHELAL – Appellant
Versus
RAMLAL NANDRAM – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A P Chaube, Fida Hussain, Advocates

JUDGMENT

Deo, J—This is a plaintiff's appeal against a reversing decree dismissing his suit for damages for defamation.

2. During the pendency of the appeal the sole respondent died. On an application being made to bring on record his legal representatives they objected to the substitution on the ground that the cause of action did not survive the defendant.

3. It is a well-established rule of common law that if an injury were done either to the person or to the property of another, for which unliquidated damages only could be recovered in satisfaction, the action dies with the person to whom or by whom the wrong was done except where a remedy is given to or against the personal representatives by the statute law. Several exceptions were made by statute law in England to the rule that death extinguishes liability in tort. The general rule of common law still applies to causes of action for defamation, seduction, inducing one's spouse to live with another, and to claims for damages for adultery.

4. The law of torts as administered in England is administered in this State under section 6 of the Central Provinces Laws Act as a rule of justice, equity, and good conscience. The English law



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top