Correct option is D
The correct answer is (d) R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra.
Explanation:
· R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra: This case is not related to the principle of 'Estoppel'. Instead, it deals with the admissibility of tape-recorded conversations in evidence. The Supreme Court of India held that tape-recorded conversations are admissible as evidence if they are relevant to the matters in issue and their authenticity is proved.
Information Booster:
1. Shri Krishna v. Kurukshetra University: This case dealt with the principle of estoppel, where a student was estopped from challenging the validity of his examination after appearing for it.
2. Sharat Chandra Dey v. Gopal Chandra Laha: This case involved the principle of estoppel in the context of property law, where the court held that a person who accepted a partition deed could not later deny its validity.
3. Express Newspaper Pvt. Limited v. Union of India: This case involved the principle of estoppel concerning the contractual obligations and representations made by parties.
Additional Information:
· Estoppel: A legal principle that prevents a person from arguing something contrary to a claim made or implied by their previous words or actions.
