https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172789 A party who secures continued occupation of premises by furnishing an undertaking required by the High Court and taking the benefit of that order cannot later challenge the same eviction order under Article 136. The legal effect of accepting the benefit is not undone by adding a reservation of rights in the undertaking. The doctrine of election applies: a litigant may not approbate and reprobate by relying on an order for advantage while attacking it afterward. On that basis, the petitioner was barred from invoking Article 136 against the eviction direction after availing the time granted to vacate. en-us Fri, 23 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:58:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172789 A party who secures continued occupation of premises by furnishing an undertaking required by the High Court and taking the benefit of that order cannot later challenge the same eviction order under Article 136. The legal effect of accepting the benefit is not undone by adding a reservation of rights in the undertaking. The doctrine of election applies: a litigant may not approbate and reprobate by relying on an order for advantage while attacking it afterward. On that basis, the petitioner was barred from invoking Article 136 against the eviction direction after availing the time granted to vacate. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 23 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172789