The legal dispute centered around the ownership of a mosque in Mercara, Karnataka, with Jumma Masjid, Mercara, asserting ownership and Kodimaniandra Deviah, the respondent, claiming to have purchased the mosque from the previous owner.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court determined that Jumma Masjid was estopped from disclaiming Kodimaniandra Deviah’s title to the mosque. The court concluded that Jumma Masjid had made a representation to Kodimaniandra Deviah, indicating that the previous owner had the authority to sell the mosque. Furthermore, the court found that Kodimaniandra Deviah had relied on this representation when acquiring the mosque. Consequently, the court held that Jumma Masjid could not retract its representation and deny Kodimaniandra Deviah’s title.
The Jumma Masjid v. Kodimaniandra Deviah case holds significance in the realms of estoppel and property law. It sets a precedent that an individual making a representation, upon which another person detrimentally relies, cannot later repudiate that representation. Additionally, the case establishes a principle in property law that a person buying property from an individual lacking the authority to sell may still gain title if the true owner is estopped from disputing their title. The key points of the case include Jumma Masjid’s estoppel, the representation regarding the previous owner’s authority, Kodimaniandra Deviah’s reliance on this representation, and Jumma Masjid’s inability to deny Kodimaniandra Deviah’s title based on the established estoppel.