Law: Evidence Act (I of 1872)

Section: 115

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962

Section: 98

(a) Evidence Act (I of 1872)   S. 115-Estoppel-Allotment of land made in favour of S cancelled on appeal and land allotted D-Contention that before acceptance of appeal D agreed to allotment of some other land and thus waived his right to disputed land and was estopped from claiming It-Held, representa tion must be shown to have been made with intention of producing certain state of belief in mind of representee not making in unequivocal, definite, and clear manner any statement relinquishing his right to disputed land but continuing his grievance by filing appeal--Not estopped from claiming disputed land merely for having temporarily selected alternative land by way of abundant caution-Nor did any question of approbation or reprobation arise fn circumstances. The respondent's application for allotment of the disputed land under the Horse Breeding Scheme was pending before the Revenue Authority when it was allotted to the petitioner under the scheme for re-settlement of displaced persons of an area of land acquired by the Government. The respondent filed an appeal which was accepted and the allotment in favour of the petitioner was cancelled. The petitioner challenged the order of the Appellate Revenue Authority contending that the respon dent, before acceptance of his appeal, agreed to the allotment of alternate land and, therefore, at the time of hearing of the appeal, he had no claim left for the disputed land. It was also contended that inconsistent positions cannot be -taken by litigant pursuing his remedies and that the respondent could not be permitted to approbate and reprobate in making selec tion of land. On behalf of the respondent it was argued that he was not hit by the doctrine of estoppel as he did not waive his claim against the disputed land and had filed an appeal against the order of its allotment to the petitioner ; that he could be deemed to have waived his right only if he had filed the appeal after accepting the alternate land ; and that his grievance for the allotment of the disputed land in favour of the petitioner continued and as such the petitioner could not be said to have been led to any conclusion adverse to his interest.…