Sunday, 4 February 2018

Whether admission given in written statement of some other case can be relied on?

 An `admission' is a statement of fact which waives or dispenses with the production of evidence by conceding that the fact asserted by the opponent is true. The Supreme Court has observed:

Admissions as defined under Section 17 and 20 and fulfilling requirement of Section 21 are substantive evidence. The admission is a best evidence against the party making it though not conclusive, shifts the onus to the maker on principle that what the party himself admits to be true may be reasonably presumed to be true so that until onus is discharged the facts admitted must be taken to be true. (see Mohd.Koya v. T.K.S.M.A. Muthukoya MANU/SC/0240/1978 : [1979]1SCR664 ).
67. The statements in pleadings are admissions against the party making them. In Union of India v. Moksh Builders etc. MANU/SC/0057/1976 : [1977]1SCR967 , the Supreme Court cited a statement from its own earlier decision to the effect that an admission is substantive evidence of the fact admitted and when properly proved is relevant irrespective of the fact whether the maker approved it in the witness box or not and when he appears; whether he was confronted with those statements or not in case he made a statement contrary to his admission. Admission so far as facts are concerned binds the maker of the admission. Admission may be oral or contained in documents, e.g. Letters, depositions, affidavits, plaints, written statements, deeds, receipts etc. Admissions in pleadings are judicial admissions. They can be made foundation of rights. Admission in the written statement filed in some other case have been held by the Supreme Court to be an important piece of evidence and, therefore, entitle to its due weight though like all other admissions, it is neither conclusive nor irrefutable. (see Shankar v. Vithalrao MANU/SC/0495/1989: AIR1989SC879 ). In the case on hand, admissions are given in the written statement filed in the very case.

Appeal Nos. 364 and 441 of 2005 in Writ Petition No. 1097 of 2004

Decided On: 11.06.2007

Hindoostan Spg. and Wvg. Mills Ltd. Vs.  Hindustan Crown Mills Siddhivinayak Kamgar Karmachari Sangharsha Sanghatana 

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Dr. S. Radhakrishnan and V.C. Daga, JJ.

Citation: 2007 (4) ALLMR 376.
Read full judgment here: Click here

Print Page

No comments:

Post a comment