C. M. LODHA, C. J. - (1.) THIS case comes up to-day for orders on an application by the legal representatives of the deceased appellant Velraj to be substituted as appellants in place of Velraj. They are his wife and son.
(2.) VELRAJ died on December 4, 1977, and this application has admittedly been made on March 13, 1978, after the expiry of limitation prescribed for the same. Mr. Mekhtoor Mal Singhvi, learned counsel for the respondent, has taken a preliminary objection that the application cannot be maintained in view of the fact that this appeal arises out of a suit for damages on account of malicious prosecution, which was dismissed by the trial court. It is urged that the right to sue for legal expenses or other losses caused to a person due to a malicious prosecution instituted against him is a personal right and it does not survive to the legal representatives of such person. In support of this contention reliance has been placed on C. Jayaprakash vs. State (1), Punjab Singh vs. Ramautar Singh (2) and Mahtab Singh vs. Nub Lal (3 ). In our opinion, the law is well settled. The maxim, 'actio personalis moritur cum persona' does apply when the action is one for damages for personal wrong. In the present case, there is no denying the fact that the suit is one for damages on account of the personal injury and wrong done to the deceased In this view of the matter, we have no alternative but to accept the preliminary objection and dismiss the appeal on the ground that the cause of action does not survive to the legal representatives of the deceased-plaintiff-appellant Velraj. This appeal is accordingly dismissed, but there will be no order as to costs. .;