Saturday, 18 April 2015

Whether suggestion made in cross examination can be treated as admission?

The interrogatories would suggest that the marriage had taken place in that year 1955. It may be before May or after May, 1955, nothing is clinching. Adverting to the suggestion put in the course of cross-examination to the respondent by the Counsel for the petitioner, it is so obvious that he had not taken instructions from the petitioner. The petitioner in her evidence has clearly stated that she did not remember as to when the marriage took place. It is for that reason that the date of marriage was not obviously mentioned in the petition nor in the reply statement filed by the Counsel for the petitioner. All of a sudden, however, in the course of cross-examination of the respondent, the counsel has put a random suggestion whether the marriage had not taken place in the year N57. It is obvious from reading the evidence of the petitioner and the interrogatories that this suggestion eminates from the lawyer and was not rooted in the knowledge of the petitioner. Therefore, no evidentiary value can be attached. Besides a mere suggestion made and denied is not evidence at all.

Karnataka High Court
Parameshwari Bai vs Muthojirao Scindia on 29 July, 1980
Equivalent citations: AIR 1981 Kant 40, ILR 1981 KAR 78

Bench: G Sabhahit, D V Rao

Print Page

Whether stray sentences elicited in cross-examination can be construed as admission?


Thus, it is clear that these stray sentences elicited in the cross-examination could hardlv be construed as admission. The Supreme Court of India, in the case of Chikkam Koteswara Rao v. Chikkam Subbarao, speaking through Justice Hegde, as he then was, has observed in this behalf thus:
"This admission must be read along with the evidence given by him in his chief examination ............
If we read these statements along with his other evidence and in a harmonious manner, it is clear that what the appellant admitted was that the acquisition in question was made by his father on his behalf and the consideration for the same was paid by his father from out of the appellant's private funds that were in the hands of his father...........
Thus, the Supreme Court has pointed out that before the right of a party can be considered to have been defeated on the- basis of an alleged admission by him, the implication of the statement made by him must be clear and conclusive. There should not be any doubt or ambiguity about the alleged admission and to examine whether there is ambiguity in the admission, it would be necessary for the Court to read the other parts of the evidence and the stand taken by him in the pleadings. 
Karnataka High Court
Parameshwari Bai vs Muthojirao Scindia on 29 July, 1980
Equivalent citations: AIR 1981 Kant 40, ILR 1981 KAR 78

Bench: G Sabhahit, D V Rao


Print Page

Whether court can grant injunction on the basis of admission given by other side?

 Admission of party can be used against the party making! an admission of course, the party making the admission as a right to rebut the admission so made and can plead and can prove that the; admission so made is not true. The burden shall be of the party who wants to show that the admission as made is untrue. In the instant case, there is an admission of the party executing the sale deed and that execution can be used against the party making it. At the same time on the basis of the pleadings and particularly of the plaint, the cause of action has accrued to the plaintiff to protect the right of possession if any and this cause of action is by way of shield and he wants to use this as shield by getting a preventive relief of temporary injunction. He does not seek any relief other than a preventive relief to protect his right, if any, accrued under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. In such circumstances, the court cannot be helpless and should not be helpless and should pass necessary order which is just, proper and equitable in the facts and circumstances of each case. I agree with the view taken by the Bombay High Court that the temporary injunction can be granted by the Court even in such cases on the basis of the admission so made. If the court is satisfied that the admission so made, give the true picture of the case prima facie. It is for the parties to establish before the court below that who is in possession whether the recital in the document is correct or not and the burden lies on the party who wants to go back from his own admission to disprove this position that he has not correctly stated the recitals.

Rajasthan High Court
Shamsher vs Rustam And Ors. on 6 May, 1987
Equivalent citations: AIR 1988 Raj 188, 1987 (2) WLN 224

Bench: D Mehta
Print Page

When admission should not be used against its maker?

Before the right of a party can be considered to have been defeated on the basis of an alleged admission by him, the implication of the statement made by him must be clear and conclusive. There should be no doubt or ambiguity about the alleged admission. 

Supreme Court of India
Chikkam Koreswara Rao vs Chikkam Subbarao And Ors. on 25 February, 1970
Equivalent citations: AIR 1971 SC 1542, (1970) 1 SCC 558

Bench: A G Shah, K.S.Hegde

Print Page