In *Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghosh*, (1930) 30 Cal. 530 PC, the Privy…

Question

In *Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghosh*, (1930) 30 Cal. 530 PC, the Privy Council laid down a fundamental rule about **estoppel**. Which proposition correctly captures the holding?

Accepted Answer

C. {'text': 'The rule of estoppel does not apply where the statement is made to a person who knows the real facts and is not accordingly misled by it', 'label': 'C'}

1. In *Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghosh*, the Privy Council held that **the rule of estoppel does not apply where the statement is made to a person who knows the real facts and is not accordingly misled by it**.
2. The rationale is that the person seeking to invoke estoppel must have **actually been misled**.
3. The case also gave rise to the wider rule that a minor's agreement is **void ab initio** under the Indian Contract Act.
4. The other options describe rules not laid down by the case.
_Source: ICSI CS Executive Paper 1 — Jurisprudence, Interpretation & General Laws, Lesson 11 (Indian Evidence Act, 1872), pp. 251-272._

Answer

{'text': 'The rule of estoppel applies even when the statement is made to a person who knows the real facts and is not misled by it under any circumstance whatsoever under any provision of any law in force in India', 'label': 'A'}

Answer

{'text': 'The rule of estoppel applies only where both parties are minors at the time of the statement under any provision of any law in force in any State of the Indian Union regardless of any other facts of the case', 'label': 'B'}

Answer

{'text': 'The rule of estoppel applies only where both parties are public servants at the time of the statement under any provision of any law in force in any State of the Indian Union regardless of any other facts of the case', 'label': 'D'}