Karam Singh Verma vs. Bidhi Chand and others RSA No. 147 of 2020 03.12.2025 Present: Mr. Surya Chauhan, Advocate, for the appellant. Appeal against respondents No. 1 to 3 stands abated, vide orders dated 22.05.2024, 25.09.2024 and 16.09.2025. Mr. Diwakar Dev Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No. 4/State. The suit in the case at hand was filed by the present appellant for recovery against the respondents. The suit had primarily been filed by the present appellant on account of alleged mental, physical, and financial suffering occasioned on the appellant on account of registration of an alleged false case under the Prevention of Corruption Act by the respondents. The suit was dismissed. The 1st Appeal preferred thereof was also dismissed. Insofar as respondent No.1 is concerned, the present appeal had been dismissed as having been abated on 22.5.2024. Insofar as respondent No.2 is concerned, the present appeal had been dismissed as having been abated on 25.9.2024 and on 16.09.2025 insofar as respondent No. 3 is concerned, the present appeal has been dismissed as having been abated. In this context, it would be appropriate to refer to the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court in Melepurath Sankunni Ezhuthassan vs. Thekittil Geopalankutty Nair, (1986) 1 SCC 118. The relevant extract of the same is being reproduced herein below:- 5. Under the common Law, the general rule was that death of either party extinguished any cause of action in tort by one against the other. This was expressed by the maxim Action personalis moritur cum persona" ( A personal action dies with the person ). However, by the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provision) Act, 1934, all causes of action vested in a person survive for the benefit of his estate except causes of action for defamation or seduction which abate on the death of such person. As the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1970, abolished the right of action for seduction of a spouse or a child from January 1, 1971, the only cause of action which would abate in England on the death of a person suing would be now a cause of action for defamation. 6. So far as this country is concerned, which causes of action survive and which abate is laid down in section 306 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, which provides as follows : "306. Demands and rights of action of or against deceased survive to and against executor or administrator. - All demands whatsoever and all rights to prosecute or defend any action or special processing existing in favour of or against a person at the time of his decease, survive to and against his executors or administrators; except causes of action for defamation, assault as defined in the Indian Penal Code, or other personal injuries not causing the death of the party; and except also cases where, after the death of the party, the relief sought could not be enjoyed or granting it would be nugatory. Section 306 speaks of an action and not of an appeal. Reading section 306 along with Rules 1 and 11 of Order XXII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, it is, however, clear that a cause of action for defamation does not survive the death of the appellant. In view thereof, the present appeal is dismissed, as having abated. Appeal stands disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Bipin C. Negi) Judge December 3rd, 2025 (Susheel)