Promissory Estoppel V

Posted on by Rudrajyoti Nath Ray

Kasinka Trading v. Union of India, (1995) 1 SCC 274.

Shrijee Sales Corporation v. Union of India, (1997) 3 SCC 398.

STO v. Shree Durga Oil Mills, (1998) 1 SCC 572.

State of Rajasthan v. Mahaveer Oil Industries, (1999) 4 SCC 357.

Shree Sidhbali Steels Ltd. v. State of U.P., (2011) 3 SCC 193.

“This Court has specifically and clearly held, Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel cannot be invoked in abstract and Courts are bound to consider all aspects including the objective to be achieved and the public good at large. When public interest warrants, Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel cannot be invoked. It is not a hard-and-fast rule but an elastic one, objective of which is to do justice.”

– Hon’ble Justice M.R. Shah, Union of India v. M/s. V.V.F Limited [Civil Appeal Nos. 2256-2263 of 2020].

'The Last Word' seeks to include not only wise and witty sayings but also curiosities. These words are not of obligation but of delight. I am not alone in my refusal to believe, law is tedious. For all who escaped these percipient eyes, mea culpa maxima. History, after all, has many cunning passages, contrived corridors and issues.