He Who Seeks Equity Must Do Equity

HE WHO SEEKS EQUITY MUST DO EQUITY
INTRODUCTION:
Any one seeking assistance of a court of equity must, as a conduction to obtaining
relief, do justice as to the matters in which the role of the court is sought for. If
anyone is willing to have the justice of equity then he should always be ready to
return equity to others.
MEANING:
The maxim means that to obtain an equitable relief the plaintiff must himself be
prepared to do ‘equity’, that is, a plaintiff must recognize and submit to the right of
his adversary. Scriptures of Islam also inform us to be conscientious:
“Woe to those who stint the measure:
Who when they take by measure from others, exact the full;
But when they meet to them or weigh to them, minis…”
APPLICATION AND CASES:
This maxim has application in the following doctrines-
i) Illegal loans
ii) Doctrine of Election
iii) Consolidation of mortgages
iv) Notice to redeem mortgage
v) Wife’s equity to settlement
vi) Equitable estoppel
vii) Restitution of benefits on cancellation of transaction
viii) Set-off
EXPLANATION:
i) Illegal loans: In Lodge v. National Union Investment Co. Ltd., the facts were as
follows. One B borrowed money from M by mortgaging certain securities to him.
M was a unregistered money-lender. Under the Money-lenders’ Act, 1900, the
contract was illegal and therefore void. B sued M for return of the securities. The
court refused to make an order except upon the terms that B should repay the
money which had been advanced to him.
ii) Doctrine of election: Where a donor A gives his own property to B and in the
same instrument purports to give B’s property to C, B will be put to an election,
either accept the benefit granted to him by the donor and give away his own
property to C or retain his own property and refuse to accept the property of A on
condition. But B cannot retain his property and at the same time take the property
of A.
iii) Consolidation of mortgages: Where a person has become entitled to two
mortgages from the same mortgagor, he may consolidate these mortgages and
refuse to permit the mortgagee to exercise his equitable right to redeem one
mortgage unless the other is redeemed. The right of consolidation now exists in
England but after the enactment of the Law of Property Act, 1925, it can exist only
by express reservation in one of the mortgage deeds.
iv) Notice to redeem mortgage: Notice to a mortgagor to redeem one’s mortgage is
an equitable right of the mortgagor.
v) Wife’s equity to a settlement: There was a time when woman’s property was
merged with that of her husband. She had no property of her own. Equity court
imposed on the husband that he must make a reasonable provision for his wife and
her children. But, now, Under the Law Reform (Married Women and Tort feasors)
Act, 1935, married women have full right on her property and it is not consolidated
with her husband’s property.
vi) Equitable estoppel: A promissory estoppel arises where a party has expressly or
impliedly, by conduct or by negligence, made a statement of fact, or so conducted
himself, that another would reasonably understand that he made a promise thereon,
then the party who made such promise has to carry out his promise.
vii) Restitution of benefits on cancellation of transaction: It is proper justice to
return the benefits of a contract which was voidable, and, equity enforced this
principles in cases where it granted relief of rescission of a contract. A party cannot
be allowed to take advantage of his own wrong.
viii) Set-off: Where there have been mutual credits, mutual debts or other natural
dealings between the debtor and any creditor, the sum due from one party is to be
set-off against any sum due from the other party, and only the balance of the
account is to be claimed or paid on either side respectively.
LIMITATION:
i) The demand for an equitable relief must arise from a suit that is pending.
ii) This maxim is applicable to a party who seeks an equitable relief.
RECOGNITION:
i) Under sec 19-A of the Contract Act, 1872 if a contract becomes voidable and the
party who entered into the contract voids the contract, he has return the benefit of
the contract.
ii) sec 35 of the Transfer of Property Act embodies the principle of election.
iii) Sec 51 and 54 of the Transfer of Property Act.
iv) In Order 8, Rule 6 of the CPC, the doctrine of Set-off is recognized.
EXCEPTIONS:
Following are exceptions to this doctrine.
I. State legislature:
It cannot apply against state legislature.
II. Acts of parliament:
It cannot apply against the acts of parliament.
III. Contrary to law:
Where a act is contrary to law. it has no application.
IV. Statutory prohibition:
Where there is statutory prohibition it cannot apply.
V. Matter of government policies:
It cannot apply against the matters of government policies.
VI. Factor of fraud:
If there is factor of fraud in a case, it will not apply.
CONCLUSION:
To conclude I can say that the court of equity being a court of conscience has to
look not a only the benefits of the plaintiff but also to the interest of the defendant
and grant relief to the plaintiff only on the condition that he is prepared to give to
the defendant what the latter deserves. the basis of the doctrine is the interposition
of equity.

He Who Seeks Equity Must Do Equity

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

He Who Seeks Equity Must Do Equity

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HE WHO SEEKS EQUITY MUST DO EQUITY

You might also like