Section 122: Estoppel by Record

Overview

Section 122 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, deals with ‘Estoppel by Record’. Simply put, this rule prevents someone from going back on a fact that has already been officially and finally decided by a court or established in an official record. It’s about giving finality to legal decisions and stopping the same issues from being re-litigated repeatedly.

Key Principles / Ingredients

• Type of Evidence: This section primarily concerns documentary evidence – specifically, court judgments, decrees, and official records. While the underlying facts might have been proven through oral evidence initially, it’s the record of that decision that’s key here.
• Conditions for Relevancy/Admissibility: For estoppel by record to apply, the following must be true: (1) There must be a prior judicial decision or official record. (2) That decision or record must have conclusively settled a specific fact. (3) The person being ‘estopped’ (prevented) must be a party to that prior proceeding or their representative.
• Burden of Proof: The party claiming estoppel by record has the burden of proving that a conclusive decision exists and that the opposing party is bound by it. They need to present the court record or official document. The opposing party then bears the burden of rebutting this, if possible (though challenging a conclusive finding is difficult).

How Courts Use this Provision

Judges use Section 122 to prevent parties from contradicting their own previous statements or positions that were part of a final court order. If a fact was decided in a previous case, and the same party now tries to argue the opposite in a new case, the court will likely invoke estoppel by record and prevent them from doing so. It promotes efficiency and prevents abuse of the legal process.

Illustrations and Examples

• Example 1: Mr. Sharma lost a case in 2022 where the court ruled he owned a specific piece of land. In 2024, he tries to claim that same land belongs to someone else in a new lawsuit. The court will likely apply estoppel by record and prevent Mr. Sharma from denying his previous admission of ownership.
• Example 2: A company, ‘Alpha Ltd.’, admitted in a previous case that it was the sole distributor of a product. Later, in a dispute with a retailer, Alpha Ltd. tries to claim it’s not the sole distributor to avoid warranty obligations. The court might apply estoppel by record, especially if the previous admission was a key part of the earlier judgment. However, the court will also consider if there were any changed circumstances justifying a different position.

Important Provisos / Explanations

The Bhartiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, doesn’t include specific provisos or explanations attached directly to Section 122. The application of the principle relies on the general understanding of estoppel and the conclusive nature of the prior decision. The court will examine the scope and finality of the previous judgment.

Difference from Old Evidence Act (if applicable)

The core principle of estoppel by record existed in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 115). The Bhartiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, largely retains this principle, but aims for clearer language and a more streamlined approach to evidence law. There aren’t significant substantive changes to the application of estoppel by record.

Key Takeaways

• Estoppel by record prevents re-litigation of settled facts.
• It applies to conclusive decisions and official records.
• The party claiming estoppel must prove the prior decision.
• It promotes finality and efficiency in the legal system.