Correct option is C
(a) Kedar Nath V. Gorie Mohamed (1886):
This case is an early Indian decision that highlights the concept of
Promissory Estoppel. In this case, a
promise made without consideration was held to be enforceable based on the reliance of the promisee. The principle behind promissory estoppel is that a person who has made a promise to another cannot later claim that the promise is unenforceable if the other party has
acted upon it.
(b) Delhi Cloth and General Mills Ltd. V. Union of India (1983):
This case is a notable example of
Promissory Estoppel in Indian jurisprudence. The Supreme Court held that the government cannot back out of its promise or representation made to an industry if the industry had relied upon it to its detriment, reinforcing the doctrine of
Promissory Estoppel against the government.
Both cases are linked to the application of
Promissory Estoppel, making option
(c) the correct answer.
Information Booster:
·
Promissory Estoppel: This legal principle prevents a party from going back on a promise, even when there is no formal contract in place, if the other party has acted upon the promise to its disadvantage.
·
Application in India: In Indian law, promissory estoppel is often applied in cases where individuals or businesses have relied on promises made by the government or other parties, and the withdrawal of such promises would cause unfair harm.
