J&K High Court Distinguishes Between Plaintiff & Defendant's Death During Pendency Of Suit, Says Injunction Right Survives Plaintiff's Death

However, in the case of the defendant, the injunction is operative solely against the defendant and upon his death, the question of binding his legal representatives by injunction would not arise, a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar explained.

The observations came while hearing a plea involving a property dispute between Vasundhara Mittra and Usha Tiwari. Usha, Aseem's mother, had filed a suit against Vasundhara seeking a permanent injunction to restrain her from interfering with her possession of the property.

During the pendency of the appeal against an interim order passed by the trial court, Usha passed away. Aseem Tiwari then filed an application before the appellate court to be substituted as a legal representative and continue the suit which came to be allowed by the appellate court.

Aggrieved of the same Vasundhara contested Aseem's impleadment in place of Usha arguing that the injunction sought by Usha Tiwari was personal and could not be pursued by her legal heir. She further contended that a Delhi court, in a separate suit between the parties, had already dismissed a similar injunction plea filed by Aseem Tiwari after his mother's death.

Rejecting these arguments Justice Dhar observed that there is a distinction between the death of a plaintiff and a defendant in an injunction suit. While an injunction cannot bind the legal representatives of a deceased defendant, the right to seek injunction survives the death of the plaintiff and can be pursued by their legal heirs, especially if they inherit the property in question.

“In the instant case, the plaintiff i.e. deceased-Usha Tiwari had sought injunction that the petitioners herein should not interfere in her possession over the property in dispute. A suit claiming injunction of this nature does not abate on death of the plaintiff. The cause of action would survive to his/her legal representatives, who come in possession of the said property”, Justice Dhar recorded.

Commenting on the contention of Aseem that the petitioner stands disinherited by the deceased-plaintiff and other associated merits Justice Dhar said that the same would be decided during the trial.

In concluding the matter, Justice Dhar dismissed the revision petition, affirming the validity of the appellate court's order. Additionally, the court granted liberty to the applicant, Yujure Tiwari, Aseem Tiwari's son to seek impleadment as a party, ensuring all relevant stakeholders have the opportunity for fair representation.

Case Title: Vasundhara Mittra and another Vs Aseem Tiwari

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 95

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment