Case Note & Summary
The litigation arose from a suit instituted by the sole respondent against the appellant, Koodalmanickam In Devaswom Managing, Committee, claiming that certain properties formed part of residential premises given to him in personam for his personal benefit under a decree of the British Resident for the State of Travancore and Cochin. He asserted that he was entitled to enjoy the income or usufruct of the properties during his tenure. The trial court dismissed the suit and the appellate court affirmed that dismissal. However, in Second Appeal No.1006/1976, a learned single Judge of the Kerala High Court allowed the appeal by order dated March 31, 1978, and held that the respondent was entitled to the enjoyment of the income or usufruct. The appellant committee then appealed to the Supreme Court by special leave. During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent died. The Court was informed that the appellant committee had taken over the property. The core legal question was whether the right claimed by the respondent, which had been recognized by the High Court, was of such a nature that it survived his death, thereby requiring the Supreme Court to decide the appeal on merits. The Court observed that the right to enjoy the property, even assuming the High Court's order was correct, was a right only in personam, that is, a right personal to the respondent. On his demise, that right ceased to exist. Consequently, nothing survived in the case for decision. The Court did not enter into the merits of the High Court's order or the respondent's original claim. It simply disposed of the appeal as infructuous, making no order as to costs. The decision did not disturb the factual possession taken over by the appellant committee, nor did it expressly affirm or reverse the High Court's order; it rested solely on the principle that a purely personal right to enjoy property ends with the death of the person in whom the right vested.
Headnote
A) Property Law - Personal Right (In Personam) - Right to Enjoy Property Ceases on Death - No Specific Statute Cited - The respondent had claimed a right to enjoy income/usufruct of properties given to him in personam under a decree of the British Resident for Travancore and Cochin. The Supreme Court held that even assuming the High Court's order was correct, the right was only in personam and on the respondent's demise the right ceased to exist. Held that the personal right did not survive the respondent. (Para 1) B) Civil Procedure - Infructuous Appeal - Disposal Without Decision on Merits - No Specific Statute Cited - Since the right in question was extinguished on the respondent's death and the appellant committee had taken over the property, nothing survived for decision in the appeal. The Supreme Court disposed of the appeal accordingly, with no order as to costs. Held that the appeal had become infructuous. (Para 1)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a personal right to enjoy income/usufruct of property, even if upheld by the High Court, survives the death of the person entitled so as to require decision on merits in the pending appeal.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court disposed of the appeal, holding that the right to enjoy the property was a right only in personam and on the respondent's demise the right ceased to exist. Consequently, nothing survived for decision. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Right in personam ceases on death
- appeal becomes infructuous when the substratum of the right is gone
- no costs in infructuous disposal
