Doctrine of Estoppel

 Definition
Estoppel is a legal principle that says someone can't argue or claim a right that
goes against something they've already said or agreed to.
Estoppel is a rule that says a person can't argue against a fact or state of things
that he or she has already said or done. To put it simply, a person shouldn't be
able to say one thing at one time and the opposite at another.
 Conditions for application of Doctrine of Estoppel
The following conditions are to be satisfied in order to apply the doctrine of
estoppel:
 The statement has to come from one person to another.
 The statement must be based on facts, not on the law.
 The statement must be based on something that is true.
 The claim must be made in a way that convinces the other person that it is
true.
 The person to whom the representation would be made should suffer a loss
by such representation.

 Object of the Principle of Estoppel

The goal of estoppel is to stop fraud and make sure that justice is done
between two parties by encouraging honesty and good faith. It stops one party
from denying the existence of a fact that he or she said was true and based on
which another person acted in a way that hurt him or her.
The rule of estoppel says that if one party makes a promise and the
other party acts on that promise and changes their position in a way that hurts
the first party, the first party cannot go back on the promise they made.
 Nature of Estoppel
The precise nature of an estoppel has given rise to different opinions. An
estoppel has at least three aspects:
1. As a rule of evidence:
2. As a matter of pleading,
3. As substantive law.

 Kinds of Estoppel
1. Estoppel by a matter of record:
This type of estoppels has to do with sections 11–14 of the Code of Civil
Procedure and sections 40–44 of the Evidence Act.
With this kind of estoppel, a person usually can't dispute the facts on which a
judgment against them is based.
2. Estoppel by Deed
Estoppel by deed is the idea that if one party agrees with another party by
deed about certain facts, neither he nor anyone claiming under him can deny
those facts.
3. Estoppel by Conduct:
Agreement, negligence, or misrepresentation can lead to this sort of
estoppel.
A person is answerable for his actions and cannot challenge the legality
of the law upon which someone gave consent to his word if anybody directly
or indirectly gives consent.
Section 115 and 117 of the Evidence Act deal with it.
  Difference between Estoppel and Res judicata
Sl. Estoppel
No.
1. Estoppel is that rule which prohibits a
person from contradicting what was
earlier said by him in a court of law.
2. Estoppel is based upon the rule of
equity which is the natural law of the
land.
3. The rule of estoppel looks into the
aspects of equity, justice and good
conscience.
4. Estoppel arises from the words or the
action or conduct of the party.
5. Estoppel bans a person from
rebutting what has been once said by
him before the court.
6. Estoppel prevents the parties from
performing certain acts which is
denying to what was earlier said by
him.
7. The principle of estoppel has been
incorporated from sections, 115 to
117 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
8. Estoppel is implied through the
actions or the conduct of the parties.
Res judicata
Res judicata is that principle which
prohibits the other courts from deciding on
the same matter, between the same parties
which has already been decided by a
competent court.
Res judicata has been recognized by the law
as a legal procedure. 
Res judicata deals only with the aspect of
public policy.
Res judicata arises out of the decision taken
by the court, that is the final decision of the
court.
In this case, the court is banned from
hearing the cases which has already been
decided by a competent court.
Res judicata prevents the court from
performing certain action which is dealing
with the same case which has already been
decided by some other court.
The principle of res judicata has been
incorporated under section 11 of the Code
of Civil procedure, 1908.
Based on previous decision given by a
competent court, Res judicata is claimed by
the parties.