PRATIMA CHOWDHURY v. KALPANA MUKHERJEE & Anr.

the principle of estoppel, postulated in Section 115 of the Indian Evidence Act. The High Court affirmed the conclusions drawn by the Co-operative Tribunal. In addition to the said principle, the High Court invoked the principles of equity and fairness. The rule of estoppel is E a doctrine based on fairness. A perusal of the provision reveals four salient pre conditions before invoking the rule of estoppel. Firstly, one party should make a factual representation to the other party. Secondly, the other party should accept and rely upon the said factual F representation. Thirdly, having relied on the said factual representation, the second party should alter his position. Fourthly, the instant altering of position, should be such, that it would be iniquitous to require him to revert back to the original position. Therefore, the G doctrine of estoppel would apply only when, based on a representation by the first party, the second party alters his position, in such manner, that it would be unfair to restore the initial position. None of the ingredients of principle of estoppel contained in Section 115 of the H 664 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 2 S.C.R. A Indian Evidence Act, can be stated to have been satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case. Herein, the first party has made no representation. The second party has therefore not accepted any representation made to her. Furthermore, the second B party has not acted in any manner, nor has the second party altered its position. Therefore, the question whether the restoration of the original position would be iniquitous or unfair does not arise at all. In the facts presented by the rival parties, especially in the background of the order c passed by the Arbitrator, that no consideration had passed in lieu of the transfer of the flat, and especially in the background of the factual finding recorded by the Co operative Tribunal and the High Court, that passing of the present controversy was consideration inconsequential, the principle of estoppel relied upon could not have been invoked, to the detriment of the appellant. In view of this, the determination by the Co operative Tribunal, as also the High Court, in having relied on the principle of estoppel, and thereby, excluding the pleas/defences raised by the appellant to support her 0 E claim is set aside. [para 27] [714-A, H; 715-A-G; 717-E]