NITA NASKAR Vs. MANAS KUMAR MOITRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -HEARD Mr. Brahmachari, the learned Advocate for the Decree Holder, on his petition for an order directing substitution of the legal heirs of the Judgment-debtor, Dr. Manas Kumar Moitra, on the ground that the decretal dues should now be realised from the properties left by Dr. Moitra. It is contended by Mr. Brahmachari that since the decretal amount is due to the decree holder, but since in the meantime the JDr has breathed his last, the only remedy available to the decree holder is to get her decretal amount satisfied out of the properties left by the deceased JDr.

(2.) BUT, in our opinion, this contention does not hold water. In a case of this nature the liability of a JDr ends with his death. It will be most unjust, improper and, for that matter, illegal to hold the legal heirs of the deceased JDr liable for some laches or faults which were committed by the deceased JDr and which were thus out and out his personal liability. If for the sake of argument it is assumed that the legal heirs of the deceased JDr should also be proceeded against in this execution case, then its logical corollary will be to pass an order sentencing them to prison or with fine if the law so requires and, in our opinion, that will not be permissible under the established principles of law on criminal jurisprudence. This is the reason why in a criminal case when the accused person dies, his legal heirs are never called upon to shoulder the liability of their predecessor-in-interest, because the liability in such a case is out and out personal. For this reason an order attaching the properties left by the JDr will be invalid because all such properties have devolved on the successors.

(3.) CONSIDERING these reasons we are of the view that it will be not at all justified to bring on record the legal heirs of the deceased JDr or to help the decree holder to realise his dues from them in this execution case.