Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Supreme Court Upholds Estoppel in Release Deed Case, Denies Claimants' Share in Separate Property

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India upheld the principle of estoppel in a case involving a Release Deed, ruling that the claimants were estopped from staking a claim to a share in the separate property of their grandfather. The court's decision reinforces the significance of equitable principles in determining property rights and highlights the importance of understanding the legal consequences of executing such deeds.

The case revolved around Shri Sengalani Chettiar, who had two marriages, and the appellants, who were the sons of Shri Chandran, the son from the first marriage. The disputed property, identified as separate property of Shri Sengalani Chettiar, became the subject of contention when Shri Chandran executed a Release Deed relinquishing his share in the property. The Release Deed, executed with valuable consideration, aimed to protect the interests of a mentally ill son born from Shri Sengalani Chettiar's second marriage.

The court examined the validity of the Release Deed and its effect on the claimants' right to inherit the property. It held that although the deed itself may not have resulted in a lawful transfer, Shri Chandran's conduct, coupled with the receipt of consideration, created an estoppel. The court found that the intention of Shri Chettiar was to cut off the claimants' inheritance rights and secure the interest of his son from the second marriage.

Supreme court stated, "The very fact that Shri Chettiar did not execute any document by way of Will only shows that he proceeded on the basis that the branch represented by Shri Chandran was being cut off from inheritance from the property in question." It further emphasized that the appellants, being children of the predeceased son, could not claim immunity from the operation of the Principle of Estoppel under Section 8(a) of the Hindu Succession Act.

The court's decision underscores the importance of understanding the consequences of executing Release Deeds and the legal principles governing property rights. It affirms the principle that equitable estoppel can bar a party from asserting a right to property when their conduct and the receipt of valuable consideration create an estoppel. This judgment serves as a reminder of the need to carefully consider the implications of such legal documents in property transactions and inheritances.

Date of Decision: January 25, 2023

ELUMALAI @ VENKATESAN & ANR  vs M. KAMALA AND ORS. & ETC. 

Latest Legal News