Doctrine of election bars challenge to compromise after acceptance of its benefit with knowledge of inconsistent rights.

A party who, with knowledge of two inconsistent rights, voluntarily accepts the benefit of one and acts on it is barred by the doctrine of election and estoppel from later impeaching the transaction that conferred that benefit. Here, the plaintiff knew a challenge to the compromise was pending, understood that the deposited amount represented the compromise benefit, and nonetheless withdrew it after attaining majority. The Court treated that conduct as affirmation of the compromise and the deed of release, held that full knowledge of every detail was unnecessary, and barred the suit from proceeding. The preliminary objection succeeded and the suit was dismissed with costs.

---

---

Issues: Whether the plaintiff, by accepting and withdrawing the amount deposited under the compromise after attaining majority, was precluded from challenging the order sanctioning the compromise and the deed of release.

Analysis: The plaintiff knew that a suit challenging the compromise was pending, was aware that the amount deposited in the Accountant-General's office represented the compromise benefit, and nonetheless applied for and withdrew that amount. The Court held that the material question was not whether every detail of the compromise was known, but whether the plaintiff had sufficient knowledge of two inconsistent rights and voluntarily chose one of them. On that basis, the doctrine of election applied. The authorities relied on by the plaintiff were distinguished as cases involving appeals against quantum or situations where acceptance of benefit did not amount to affirmation of the very transaction under challenge.

Conclusion: The plaintiff was held to have elected to abide by the compromise and was barred from impeaching it and the release in the suit.

Final Conclusion: The preliminary objection succeeded, the suit could not proceed on the remaining issues, and the suit was dismissed with costs.

Ratio Decidendi: A party who, with knowledge of two inconsistent rights, voluntarily accepts the benefit of one and acts upon it is barred by election and estoppel from later challenging the transaction from which that benefit was derived.

---