Estoppel || Doctrine of Estoppel ||Difference between Estoppel and Resjudicata

Q. What is the Doctrine of Estoppel? What is Difference between Estoppel and resjudicata? What is the type of Estoppel?

Doctrine of Estoppel

Estoppel literally means - "to Stop".
According to it ,when any person says one thing at one time and other thing at another time then he is prevented from doing so .This is estoppel.

The doctrine of Estoppel is mention in the Section 115 of the Evidence Act .
According to it - "When one person has, by his declaration act or omission, intentionally
caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon such belief neither he nor his representative shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding
between himself and such person or his representative, to deny the truth of that thing.
Example-
X, intentionally and falsely leads Y to believe that certain land belongs to X, and thereby induces Y to buy and pay for it.
The land afterwards becomes the property of X, and X seeks to set aside the sale on the ground that, at the time of the sale, he had no title. He must not be allowed to prove his want of title.

Thus the principle of estoppel is that when a person by his words whether written or spoken, or his conduct makes a representation that a certain state of things is true and the other person, relying upon the truth of the representation, alters his position, the person making the representation will be estoppel from denying the truth of it.

Essential Elements-

Following are the essential elements of estoppel-
1. a person misrepresents by his act, omission or declaration,
(2) such misrepresentation is regarding the existence of any fact,
(4) Such misrepresentation is intentionally caused to make a person believe a thing.,
(4) the other person believes such misrepresentation to be true,
(5) the other person does some act believing such misrepresentation;
(6) such act causes injury to the other person; and
(9) the person making the representation deny the truth of it.

Types of Estoppel

The main types of estoppel are following-
1.Promissory Estoppel,
2.Equitable Estoppel
3.Estoppel, by record
4.Estoppel by deed
5.Estoppel by conduct

1.Promissory Estoppel-

When any person promises another to lend him certain relief or profit and the other changes his position on the basis of such promise, then the person making promise shall be stopped from saying that his promise was without any consideration.
Promissory Estoppel has originated as an exception to consideration in the field of contract law.

2.Equitable Estoppel-

Such estoppel which has not been provided by any statute is called equitable estoppel.

3.Estoppel, by record

Estoppel by record is created by the decision of any competent court. When any court decides finally over a subject then it becomes conclusive and the parties, their representative etc become bound to that decision. They cannot bring another suit on the same subject  .They are stopped from doing so. The doctrine of res judicata is an example of it.

4. Estoppel by deed

When any person becomes bound to another person on the basis of a record regarding few facts, then neither that person nor any person claiming through him shall be allowed to deny it.

5.Estoppel by Conduct

Estoppel by conduct is such estoppel which arises due to act, conduct or misrepresentation by any party.

Exceptions

The doctrine of estoppel does not apply on the following -
1.The principle does not apply against misrepresentation of minor.The application of the principle requires that misrepresentation shall be made by such
competent to contract. [Mohribibi Vs Dharam Dass Ghosh ].
2. Principle of estoppel does not apply to those matter where both parties have the knowledge of truthness.
3. Principle of estoppel does not apply against statutes. It cannot contradict the provisions of statutes.
4.The principle of estoppel does not also apply to questions of law.
5.It also does not apply to sovereign acts of the government.
6.It does not also apply to Regulations.
7.It does not also apply to Ultra Virus orders and decisions.
8.Mere silence is not estoppel. Where there is no duty to speak, there silence is not estoppel.

Difference between Estoppel and Resjudicata-

(1) Estoppel stops any person from denying the truthness of their earlier statements in civil matter, whereas resjudicata stops the court from hearing such matter which has been decided once by a competent court.
2.Estoppel stops any person to say one thing at one time and other thing at other time. Whereas resjudicata ceases the jurisdiction of court to hear twice on the same matter.
3.Estoppel arises by misrepresentation or conduct of any person whereas resjudicata is based on decision of the court.
4.Estoppel is a rule of evidence law , whereas resjudicata is rule related to judicial proceeding.
5. Estoppel  is based on the principles of equity, justice and good conscience, whereas resjudicata is  based on the principles of public policy.

Difference between Estoppel and Admission-

Admissions being declarations against an
interest are good evidence but they are not conclusive and a party is always at liberty to withdraw admissions by proving that they are either mistaken or untrue. But an estoppel creates an absolute bar.

SOME SPECIFIC ESTOPPELS-

Sections 116 and 117 are  deal with estoppels in specific cases.

1.Estoppel of tenant and of licensee of person in possession (Section 116)-

Section 116 provides for estoppel of a tenant as against his landlord and of a licensee as against his licensor.
- a tenant of   immovable property or person claiming through such tenant shall not be permitted to say as against his landlord that he had no title to the property at the commencement of the tenancy.
- a person who comes upon any immovable property with the licence of the person in possession, shall not be permitted to say afterwards that his licensor had no right to the possession of property at the time when such license was given.

2. Estoppel of acceptor of a bill of exchange, bailee, or licensee (section 117)-

-An acceptor of a bill of exchange is not permitted to say as against the holder of the bill that the drawer had no  authority to draw or to endorse the bill. But he can show that the bill was not really drawn by the person whose signature it purports to bear.
- A bailee shall not be permitted to say that his Bailor had no authority to make such bailment at the time when the bailment commenced.
- a licensee shall not be permitted to to say that his licensor had no authority to grant such licence at the time when licence commenced.

Also Read -top 50 landmark judgements of supreme court

also read - supreme court top 10 judgement 2018