Nullity Of Judicial Proceedings Involving The Deceased Parties: Reconciling Doctrinal Foundations With Procedural Deviations

Abstract

This paper revisits the doctrine of nullity in Indian civil procedure to interrogate a quietly disquieting judicial trend: the validation of decrees passed in favour of deceased parties, despite explicit statutory provisions. It examines how the doctrine—anchored in the foundational maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona (a personal action dies with the person)—safeguards jurisdictional integrity by asserting that no adjudication can stand in the absence of a legally existent party. It contends that nullity is not a procedural formality but a jurisdictional imperative. Yet, Indian courts have carved subtle exceptions—upholding decrees 'in favor of' deceased litigants on grounds of equity, procedural harmlessness, or absence of demonstrated prejudice. This study exposes the doctrinal dissonance that arises when equity is allowed to override statutory mandates. Through a critical engagement with key judgments—including P.M.A.M. Vellayam Chetty, N. Jayaram Reddy, and the binding authority of Gurnam Singh v. Gurbachan Kaur—it demonstrates how such deviations compromise the procedural clarity enshrined in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It warns that these exceptions, however well-intentioned, risk judicially legislating beyond codified boundaries. The paper urges that justice pursue outcomes and uphold the legal processes conferring legitimacy. It affirms that the proceeding is non est when jurisdiction is lost. The legitimacy of a judicial system rests not on the justice of its results but on the fidelity of its means.