Sadiq Ali Khan v. Jai Kishori
Rule established
Silence without knowledge of one's rights does not constitute implied election; awareness of competing claims is essential
Facts
- A deed disposed of property belonging to B, while conferring a benefit on B
- B was unaware of their rights over the property or the fact that the deed purported to transfer their property
- B's silence over several years was claimed as implied election
Issue
- Whether mere silence or inaction constitutes implied election under S.35 when the person is unaware of their rights.
Held
- Silence without knowledge of one's rights does not constitute election. For implied election to operate, the person must be fully aware of: (a) the benefit being offered; (b) the transfer of their own property; and (c) the inconsistency of accepting one and claiming the other. Without such knowledge, no inference of election arises.
Ratio Decidendi
Election presupposes informed choice. A person who does not know they have a right to the property being transferred cannot be said to have chosen between that right and the benefit. Knowledge of one's rights is a prerequisite for any inference of election from conduct or silence.
How to use it in an exam
Use when the problem involves alleged implied election. Key line: "Election requires awareness of competing rights; silence without knowledge cannot constitute election."
Source
Source: Mulla TPA 13th ed.
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.