JUDGMENT
Jwala Prasad, J.
1. The appeal must be decreed. The Court below decreed the appeal and dismissed the suit upon the ground that the plaintiff died before the appeal was filed. The plaintiff obtained a decree from the Munsif on the 3rd October 1918 for a declaration that the kobala executed by his father, defendant No. 4, in favour of defendants NOS. 1 and 2 in the name of defendant No. 3, was invalid and not binding upon him, and for confirmation of possession. The decree of the Munsif confirmed the possession of the plaintiff along with his father, defendant No. 4.
2. The defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3, therefore, appealed, and as the plaintiff had died before the appeal was filed, the defendant No. 4, his legal representative, was made respondent. The learned Additional Judge decreed the appeal simply upon the ground that the suit had abated. The ground stated by him is that the right to sue was personal to the deceased plaintiff, Babu Ram Saha, and upon his death there was no one to continue the suit. In this he is clearly wrong. The suit related to property and the father of the deceased plaintiff was his legal representative.
3. In the second place, the suit having terminated in a decree could not abate. Order XXII, relating to abatement, applies only before the suit terminates in a decree. The case relied upon by the learned Judge: Padarath Singh v. Raja Ram 4 A. 235 : A.W.N. (1882) 29 : 6 Ind. Jur. 542 : 2 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 863 was over-ruled by a Full Bench of the same Court in Muhammad Husain v. Khushalo 9 A. 131 (F.B.) : A.W.N. (1886) 822 : 5 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 519. On the came point may be referred the cases of Gopal Ganesh Abhyankar v. Ramchandra Sadashiv 26 B. 597 : 4 Bom. L.R. 325; Paramen Chetty v. Sundararaja Naick 26 M. 499 and Josiam Thirucengadachariar v. Sawmi Iyengar 5 Ind. Cas. 937 : 34 M. 76 : 7 M.L.T. 195 : (1910) M.W.N. 543 : 20 M.L.J. 760.
4. Even in cases of personal right, such as claim for damages, the principle actio personalis moritur cum persona does not apply after the decree is passed inasmuch as, in my view, the decree is a valuable property and is capable of inheritance as any other property.
5. The judgment of the Court below is set aside. The case is sent back to the learned Judge for deciding the appeal on merits. The appellant is entitled to costs.