Explain the legal word In personam
In Personam is a legal phrase of Latin origin. In Latin, the maxim means ‘against a particular person/individual’
Question: Explain the legal word In personam. Find the answer only on Legal Bites. [Explain the legal word In personam.] Answer In Personam is a legal phrase of Latin origin. In Latin, the maxim means ‘against a particular person/individual’. A legal proceeding in personam is one that requires a clearly enforceable judgment against an individual. Such action may affect the rights and interests of the defendant. In a case against a particular person, that person must have a summons,...
Question: Explain the legal word In personam.
Find the answer only on Legal Bites. [Explain the legal word In personam.]
Answer
In Personam is a legal phrase of Latin origin. In Latin, the maxim means ‘against a particular person/individual’. A legal proceeding in personam is one that requires a clearly enforceable judgment against an individual. Such action may affect the rights and interests of the defendant. In a case against a particular person, that person must have a summons, and a judgment is pronounced that only applies to that person and is known as an ‘in personam’ judgment.
In personam claim only defines the rights between the respective parties to an action and does not affect the rights of any other third party. Therefore, an individual right can only be exercised against one disputing party. Any order issued by a judge for which the proportion of jurisdiction and jurisdiction in personam has not been duly granted is void or not legally binding.
Illustration: Plaintiffs can sue the defendant personally for breach of contract. The complainant must determine that the court has both fundamental powers over the respondent and material power to preside over the case to bring a case directly against the respondent. With respect to the personam cases, the decision covers only the parties.
Thus, a personal right (in personam) is a right attached to a particular person, such as a right under a contract, tort against a defendant, or a license.
In R. Viswanathan v. Rukn-Ul-Mulk Syed Abdul Wajid [1963 SCR (3) 22], the Supreme Court of India ruled that in an in personam case, the court has jurisdiction to order movable property when the parties submit it to the jurisdiction. A person who files a lawsuit in a foreign court and seeks an personam judgment, after a judgment has been made against him, cannot say that the court does not have the jurisdiction to which he invokes and that the court is present because it is expressly acknowledged that a party present inside or a party that has submitted to the tribunal cannot after questioning by the wards.
Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams
- CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – I of X
- CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – II of X
- CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – III of X
- CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – IV of X
- CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – V of X
- CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VI of X
- CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VII of X
- CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VIII of X
- CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – IX of X
- CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – X of X