Nemo Est Haeres Viventis
Nemo Est Haeres Viventis
1. Meaning
Latin maxim: “Nemo est haeres viventis”
Translation: “No one can be the heir of a living person.”
It is a fundamental principle of succession law.
Essence: A person cannot acquire rights in the property of another until that person dies. Any attempt to transfer or claim inheritance before death is legally invalid.
2. Legal Basis
Section 6(a), Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (related to expectancy of succession):
“A mere chance of succeeding to property cannot be transferred.”
This section embodies the principle of nemo est haeres viventis.
Rationale:
Protects the property of the living owner.
Prevents speculative claims or sales based on future succession.
Ensures certainty of title.
3. Examples
A son cannot sell his expectancy of inheritance from his living father.
A nephew cannot transfer his chance to inherit from an uncle who is still alive.
Any transaction based on a future inheritance is considered void as a transfer of mere expectancy.
4. Distinction from Vested or Contingent Interest
| Aspect | Spes Successionis / Expectancy | Vested Interest | Contingent Interest |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nature | Mere hope or expectation | Present ownership of property with future enjoyment | Dependent on condition precedent |
| Transferability | Cannot be transferred (nemo est haeres viventis) | Transferable | Transferable (if law allows) |
| Certainty | Uncertain | Certain | Conditional |
5. Case Laws
(A) Amrit Narayan v. Gaya Singh (1917 PC)
Facts: Expectant heir attempted to sell his chance of inheritance.
Held: Transaction was void as it involved mere expectancy.
Principle: Nemo est haeres viventis — no one can transfer rights to a property until the owner dies.
(B) Rambaran Prasad v. Ram Mohit Hazra (1967 SC)
Facts: Minor reversioner tried to sell his expectation of property.
Held: Such sale is void; only after the property vests upon death can the person transfer rights.
Principle: Reinforces that expectancy cannot be alienated.
(C) Subramania Chettiar v. Arunachalam (1928 Mad HC)
Held: Attempted transfer of future inheritance by an heir-apparent is null and void.
6. Exceptions / Nuances
Gifts by living owner:
Owner can gift property during lifetime; the heir cannot act in place of owner.
Future property under contract:
A person can make contracts related to property he will own in the future only if such future property is not dependent on inheritance (e.g., property to be acquired under a purchase agreement).
Important: Speculative rights based on inheritance cannot be sold or transferred.
7. Key Principles for Exam
Core rule: Nobody can inherit from a living person.
Legal effect: Any transfer based on future inheritance is void.
Embedded in law: Section 6(a), TPA, 1882, protects this principle.
Distinction: Only after death does the property become transferable (either by will or intestate succession).
Equity protection: Courts prevent exploitation of heirs by forbidding sale of expectancy.
8. Conclusion (Exam Answer Style)
Nemo est haeres viventis is a fundamental legal maxim prohibiting any transfer of property rights based on future succession. Transactions executed by heirs or expectant claimants during the lifetime of the owner are void. Leading cases like Amrit Narayan v. Gaya Singh (1917) and Rambaran Prasad v. Ram Mohit Hazra (1967) reaffirm that a mere expectancy (spes successionis) cannot be alienated. This principle ensures certainty of ownership and protects the property rights of living owners under Indian law.
RELATED Blog
0 comments