Directors is hit by the
doctrine of approbation and reprobation and the same is also
against equity and fair play. The learned Senior Counsel
placed ... that on the facts of
the case the doctrine of approbation and reprobation is
applicable.
(v) That the jurisdiction of the Company Law Board under
priority cut till they were adversely
affected; the petitioners cannot approbate and reprobate; APM and
non-APM gas cannot be compared with
matters of contractual obligations. Further, the party-
respondents cannot approbate and reprobate as they did not raise
any objection at the time of appointment fixing
petitioner
to make payment within 15 days; they cannot approbate and
reprobate; they are estopped from claiming to the contrary; the
first respondent
being representatives in interest, are not entitled to approbate or
reprobate
and they are estopped to contend otherwise but the available judicial and
evidentiary admissions
partition, since the parties cannot be allowed to
approbate and reprobate basing on the principle of
estoppel. Defendants having gained advantage of
allowing the holding
case as is clear from his affidavits wherein he approbated and
reprobated but also offered an apology. As pointed out by the
Supreme Court
that relief. The petitioner-workman cannot be
permitted to approbate and reprobate.
In so far as the issue of denial of other benefits is concerned
