The ratio of this case primarily revolves around the principle that a renunciation of a right based on an expectancy, such as an inheritance, is not prohibited by law and can be valid if supported by consideration and conduct. Furthermore, the case establishes that such a renunciation, when coupled with conduct that misleads others into believing the right has been relinquished, can operate as an estoppel against the claimant when the inheritance rights vest. The court emphasizes that the principle of estoppel can be applied to prevent a person from asserting a right to inheritance if their conduct has led others to believe that they have relinquished such rights, especially when supported by consideration. Additionally, the case clarifies that under Muslim law, a mere expectancy cannot be transferred or renounced, but conduct and consideration can create an equitable estoppel that binds the parties. The decision underscores that the law recognizes family arrangements and conduct as valid indicators of intent and can operate to bar claims to inheritance when such conduct has led to a change in the position of other parties, even if the formal legal validity of the renunciation is questionable.