Estoppel is a rule of evidence that prevents a person from going back on a representation once another person has relied upon it. The law does not permit parties to approbate and reprobate at will. If your conduct or statement has led someone to alter their position, you cannot later deny what you earlier asserted.
It is not about discovering truth in the abstract. It is about preventing injustice caused by inconsistency.
Statutory Basis
Estoppel under Indian law is governed by Section 115 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The section embodies the equitable principle that a person who induces another to believe something and act upon that belief cannot later deny its truth.
Importantly, it is a rule of evidence, not a rule of substantive law. It does not create rights; it prevents denial of existing facts.
Meaning
Estoppel is a legal bar. It stops a person from denying or asserting something contrary to what has already been established as truth. This is based on their own act, conduct, or representation.
In essence, the law says:
You cannot mislead someone and then profit from that inconsistency.
Also Read- Burden of Proof in Criminal vs Civil Cases
Essential Elements
For estoppel to apply, certain conditions must be satisfied.
First, there must be a representation by words, conduct, or omission.
Second, the representation must be intended to be acted upon.
Third, the other party must have acted upon it.
Fourth, the party acting upon it must have suffered a change of position.
If even one element is missing, estoppel fails.
Nature of Representation
The representation may be express or implied. It may arise from silence where there is a duty to speak. However, the representation must relate to an existing fact, not a future promise or intention.
Statements of law do not usually create estoppel, as everyone is presumed to know the law.
Does Not Apply Against Law
One of the most important limitations is that it cannot operate against a statute.
No amount of consent, conduct, or representation can legalise something that the law prohibits. Estoppel cannot be used to defeat mandatory legal provisions or validate an illegal act.
Estoppel and Truth
A critical point that many misunderstand:
Estoppel may operate even against the truth.
The court may prevent a party from asserting the factual truth if allowing it would result in injustice due to earlier representation. This shows that estoppel is rooted in equity, not factual correctness.
Also Read- Electronic Evidence – Section 65B
Types
Indian law recognises several forms
By Representation
This is the classic form under Section 115. It arises when a person makes a representation of fact and another relies on it.
By Conduct
Here, the conduct of a party, rather than explicit words, creates a belief that is relied upon by another.
Promissory Estoppel
Promissory estoppel prevents a party from going back on a promise, even in the absence of a formal contract, when the promisee has relied upon it.
Though not expressly mentioned in the Evidence Act, it has been strongly developed through judicial interpretation, especially against the government in appropriate cases.
By Record and by Judgment
These arise from judicial decisions and final determinations. Once an issue has been conclusively decided, the parties are barred from reopening it.
In Criminal Cases
It has limited application in criminal law. Criminal liability is based on statutory offences, not consent or representation.
An accused cannot escape criminal liability merely because the victim consented or relied on a representation, unless the statute explicitly permits it.
Estoppel vs Waiver
Both are often confused but are distinct.
Waiver is a voluntary relinquishment of a known right.
Estoppel arises from reliance induced by another’s conduct.
Waiver focuses on intention. Estoppel focuses on effect.
Importance
It promotes:
- Consistency in legal dealings
- Good faith in transactions
- Protection against unfair advantage
- Certainty in legal relations
Without estoppel, legal relations would become unstable and opportunistic.
Also Read- Character Evidence – When Relevant
Estoppel under the Evidence Act is a doctrine of fairness, not technicality. It ensures that parties cannot shift positions to suit convenience after inducing reliance.
However, it is not absolute. It does not override statutes, does not create illegality, and does not substitute proof of legal rights.
In law, truth matters.
In equity, consistency matters.
Estoppel exists where the two collide.
Connect with us on Instagram – X – LinkedIn for daily updates, quizzes, and other materials
