INTRODUCTION
On today’s show, we will talk about the case of Adani
Gas Limited v. Union of India and Others, SLP (C) Nos. 28192-28193 of
2018, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court inter alia discussed the Doctrine
of Approbate-Reprobate.
PLAIN MEANING
But before adverting any further, let us
understand the plain meaning of the terms ‘approbate’ and ‘reprobate’.
‘Approbate’ literally means to approve formally or rectify or confirm. Reprobation
has been defined in Black’s Law Dictionary, Eighth Edition, as “the
act of raising an objection or exception.”
Further, the Doctrine of Approbate-Reprobate stems
from the Latin Maxim “qui non improbat approbat” that means “a
person who does not disapprove approves.”
CONTEXT
The facts of the case are not relevant for the purposes
of this show and hence the same are not being discussed here. However, briefly
speaking, the context in the present case was that Adani was granted approval
or authorization under a law to carry out a work relating to Gas Distribution
Networks. Even though such approval or authorization excluded Adani from
performing certain other works, Adani accepted the grant of approval or authorization
and started performing the authorized works. Later on, feeling aggrieved by
exclusion of approval of certain other works, Adani contended before the Court that
grant of authorization or approval under the concerned law is unconstitutional
and ultra vires the provisions of its parent law. It is in this light
that the Hon’ble Court invoked the Doctrine of Approbate-Reprobate to explain
that one cannot breathe hot and cold at the same time. Once grant of approval
or authorization has been accepted by Adani, then later on, it cannot contend
that such grant of approval or authorization is unconstitutional. In order to
understand the Doctrine of Approbate-Reprobate in a better manner, let us go
through the pertinent observations by the Court.
OBSERVATIONS BY THE COURT
Firstly, the Court noted that the Doctrine of Approbate-Reprobate
is “one which does not permit a litigant to take contradictory stands in
the same case. A party cannot be permitted to approbate and reprobate on the
same facts and take inconsistent shifting stands.”
Secondly, the Court elaborated that “an
action at law is not a game of chess. A litigant who comes to court and invokes
its writ jurisdiction must come with clean hands. He cannot prevaricate and
take inconsistent positions.”
Thirdly, the Court traced the judicial origins of
the Doctrine of Approbate-Reprobate by citing the case of Codrington v
Codrington, 1875 LR 7 HL at 866, wherein it was observed that “he
who accepts a benefit under an instrument must adopt the whole of it, confirming
to all its provisions and renouncing every right inconsistent with it.”
Fourthly, the Court further noted that “a
man cannot adopt two inconsistent attitudes towards another: he must elect
between them and, having elected to adopt one stance, cannot thereafter be
permitted to go back and adopt an inconsistent stance.”
Fifthly, the Court observed that “the
doctrine of approbate and reprobate is based on the principle of estoppel” and an
order cannot be partly good and partly bad like the curate's egg.”
Sixthly, the Court also connected the Doctrine of
Election and the Rule of Estoppel by noting that such principles and doctrines
inhere the principle that one cannot approbate and reprobate as “taking
inconsistent pleas by a party makes its conduct far from satisfactory” and “the
parties should not blow hot and cold by taking inconsistent stands and prolong
proceedings unnecessarily.”
CONCLUSION AND BASIC PRINCIPLES OF
APPROBATE-REPROBATE
And lastly, in conclusion, the Court discussed the
basic principles of the Doctrine of Approbate-Reprobate as: -
a. “The approbating party must have elected,
that is made his choice, clearly and unequivocally.”
b. “It is usual but not necessary for the
electing party to have taken a benefit from his election.”
c. “The electing party's subsequent conduct
must be inconsistent with his earlier election or approbation.”
d. In essence, the Doctrine of Approbate-Reprobate
is “about preventing inconsistent conduct and ensuring a just outcome.”
Thus, I hope that the meaning and the nature of the Doctrine of Approbate-Reprobate is clear by now.
vey helpful
ReplyDelete