ADMISSIONS

QUESTIONS
⚫ What is admission? Who can make admissions?
⚫ What is an admission? Explain the relevance of
admissions in civil case.
⚫ Define admissions. State the persons whose admissions
are relevant.(**)
⚫ Define admissions and state when the statements of third
persons are admissions.
ADMISSION -meaning
⚫ An admission is a party’s statement acknowledging that a
certain statement or fact asserted against that party is true.

⚫ An admission is the testimony which the party admitting

bears the truth of a fact against himself.
Section 17 - Admission defined
⚫ “An admission is a statement, oral or documentary or
contained in electronic form, which suggests any inference as
to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made by
any of the persons, and under the circumstances, hereinafter
mentioned.”

⚫ An admission is a statement
⚫ oral or documentary or contained in electronic form,
⚫ which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant
fact, and
⚫ which is made by any of the persons, and under the
circumstances, hereinafter mentioned. (sec 18-31)
⚫ As section 17 does not require that the statement must be
self-harming, it only requires that the statement should
suggest some inference as to the fact in issue or the
relevant fact, it does not matter even if the statement is in
favour of the declarant (as in the case of exceptions under
sec 21)

⚫ A self harming statement has more relevancy than a

self-serving statement, as no person wants his own wrong.
Admissions
⚫ Statement is a genus,
⚫ admission is a species &
⚫ confession is a sub species

⚫ Admissions are statements, which admit or concede facts

asserted by the opposite party and

⚫ thereby do away with the need to produce evidence in

support of those facts.

⚫ Thus, they suggest an inference as to facts in issue or

relevant facts.
⚫ Under the English law the term ‘admission’ is used in
civil cases, whereas ‘confession’ is used in criminal cases.
⚫ But, the Indian Evidence Act has not made such types of
distinction. A confession is a statement made by an
accused admitting his guilt. Thus, a confession is also an
admission made by a person charged with crime stating or
suggesting the inference that he committed a crime.
⚫ Admission may be oral or documentary or contained in
electronic form,
⚫ Admission being oral includes signs, gestures and even
silence.

⚫ Example
⚫ If a person is sued for recovery of a loan, and there is an entry
in his account books recording the fact of the loan, that is an
admission on his part of his liability, or if he makes a
statement to that effect that “he does owe the money” that
will also be an admission being a direct acknowledgement of
his liability.
⚫ It will dispense with the necessity of any further proof of
the fact of the loan.
⚫ The Supreme Court in Chikam Koteswar Rao v/s C. Subbarao, AIR
1981 SC 1542, has held that before the right of a person can be
taken to be 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. It would
be necessary to read all of his statements together. Applying this
approach to the facts of a case before it, Karnataka High Court
concluded that stray statements elicited in cross-examination
cannot be taken to be an admission.

⚫ For eg., a person is charged with causing death by poisoning and he

admits to have purchased poison. This statement suggests the
inference that he is guilty of the murder unless he can prove that he
needed the poison for some innocent purpose.

⚫ The admission must be clear and unambiguous. The whole of the

statement of which the admission forms a part has to be proved
and not any edited portion of it.
KINDS OF ADMISSIONS
⚫ 1. Formal or judicial admission
⚫ An admission which is made as part of the judicial
proceedings so that it is recorded in the file of the court
is called formal or judicial admission.

⚫ In K.K. Chari v/s R.M. Sheshadri, (1973) 1 SCC 761 at

774, Held: If the tenant in fact admits that the landlord is
entitled to possession on one or the other of the statutory
grounds mentioned in the Act, it is open to the Court to act
on that admission and make an order for possession in
favour of the landlord without further enquiry.
⚫ 2. Informal or causal admission
⚫ These admissions may occur in the ordinary course of life, or in
the course of business, or in casual or informal conversation. It
may be in writing or oral. It may take the form of letters, books,
business diaries, account books, pass books or other records.
⚫ Thus any written or oral statement by a party about the facts of
the case, which is against him, is an admission.

⚫ If a statement is made to one’s wife, it will not be privileged, if it

can be proved by a third party. In Rumping v/s DPP (1964) AC
814 , the mate of a ship, charged with the murder of a woman, wrote
a letter to his wife which was tantamount to a confession of some
grave crime and gave it to the seaman for posting, who instead
handed it over to the captain, the captain to the police, the letter was
allowed to be proved as an admission.
Admission as an exception to
exclusion of hearsay evidence
⚫ If A sues B on a loan, which B denies and B makes a statement
to C, a third person, that he had taken a loan, B’s statement is
an admission and C may give evidence of it although C was
not present at the time of the loan and had only heard B admit
the fact of the loan.

⚫ Hearsay evidence is excluded because the law wants in all

cases the best evidence should be given. Admissions
constitute an exception to the hearsay rule. This is so
because an admission, though a hearsay, is nevertheless the
best evidence.
⚫ 3. Admissions by conduct
⚫ Active or passive conduct may in circumstances become
evidence of an admission. Actions of a person often speak
louder than his words.
⚫ In Moviarity v/s London Latham & Dover Ry. The
plaintiff sued the railway company for personal injury.
Evidence was admitted that he had been going about
persuading certain persons to appear for him when they
were not present at the accident. the court said that “this
species of evidence is receivable as an admission by the
party that the case he is putting forward is not the true
one. It was an admission by conduct and receivable on
that ground.
Examples
⚫ Sec 8 Illustration (g) – the question is whether A owes B
rupees 10,000. The facts that A asked C to lend him money,
and D said, in the presence and hearing of C – “I advise you
not to trust A, for he owes B 10,000 rupees” and that A went
away without making an answer, are relevant facts.

⚫ In Bessela v/s Stern, in an action for breach of promise of

marriage, it was proved that the plaintiff said to the defendant:
“You always promised to marry me, and you do not keep your
words.” The defendant did not deny the allegation but
offered her hush money. His silence as to the promise of
marriage, was held to be an admission.
REASONS FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF
ADMISSIONS
An admission is relevant evidence due to several reasons:
⚫ 1. Admissions are waiver of proof.
⚫ If a party has admitted a fact, it dispenses with the necessity of proving it. It
has been expressly adopted by section 58 of the Act.
⚫ It says - Facts admitted need not be proved. — No fact need to be proved
in any proceeding which the parties thereto or their agents agree to admit at
the hearing, or which, before the hearing, they agree to admit by any writing
under their hands, or which by any rule of pleading in force at the time they
are deemed to have admitted by their pleadings.
⚫ Provided that the Court may, in its discretion, require the facts admitted to be
proved otherwise than by such admissions.

⚫ The section confines this effect only to the formal admissions made at the
time of the trial or as part of the pleadings or in reference to the litigation.
According to the proviso of the section, the court has the discretion to
reject an admission either wholly or in part or may require further
proof. Waiver of proof therefore, cannot be an exclusive reason for relevancy
of an admission.
⚫ 2. Admissions as statement against interest.
⚫ It is natural for a man to make statement in his favour. An admission, being
a statement against the interest of the maker should be supposed to be true,
for it is highly improbable that a person will voluntarily make false
statement against his own interest.”

⚫ 3. Admissions as evidence of truth.

⚫ The statements made by the party about the facts of the case, whether they
may go in his favour or against his interest, should be relevant as
representation or reflecting the truth as against him. In Slatlerie v/s Pooley,
it was observed that “Whatever a party says in evidence against
himself….what a party himself admits to be true may be presumed to
be so.”

⚫ 4. Admissions as evidence of contradictory statements

⚫ Where there is contradiction between the statements of the party and his
case, the contradiction is relevant.
⚫ For example, A sues B upon a loan. The account book shows that the loan
was given to C. The statement in his Account Book contradicts his case
against B.
Evidentiary value of an admission
⚫ According to Section 17 an admission is a statement, oral or documentary,
which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact and
which is made to any person, and under circumstances mentioned in
Sections 18 to 31. Even though an admission plays a very important part in
judicial proceedings, it is only prima facie of proof.

⚫ The Supreme Court observed that admissions are very weak kind of
evidence and the court may reject them if it is not satisfied from other
circumstances, that they are untrue.

⚫ It is to be noted that admissions are not conclusive proof of matters

admitted unless they operate as estoppel (Sec 31).

⚫ The value of admission depends upon the circumstances in which it was

made and to whom it is made.
⚫ If one party to a suit or proceeding proves that the other party has
admitted his case then the work of the court becomes easier.

⚫ But, in certain cases an admission is used in discrediting the

parties’ statement by showing that he has on other occasions made
statements inconsistent with the cases afterwards set up. Section
153(3) deals with such use of admissions. The evidentiary value of
admission depends upon circumstances under which they are
made.

⚫ An erroneous admission on a point of law is not an admission of

a thing so as to make the admission a matter of estoppel and the
court is not precluded from deciding the rights of the parties on
a true view of the law.
⚫ Eg: Erroneous admission of evidence of prior bad act was
harmless
⚫ Chikham Koteswar Rao v/s C. Subba Rao AIR 1981 SC
1542, the SC has given some guidance in respect of the
clarity and unambiguity of the inference.
⚫ 1. before the right of the party can be taken to be defeated
on the basis of an alleged admission by him, the
implication of the statement made by him must be
clear and conclusive.
⚫ 2. there should not be any doubt or ambiguity
⚫ 3. it would be necessary to read all of his statement
together.
PERSONS WHO CAN MAKE
ADMISSIONS – sec 18, 19, 20
⚫ Persons and circumstances as “hereinafter mentioned”
have been mentioned in Sections 18 to 31.
⚫ The persons who can make admissions are:
⚫ Section 18 - Admission by party to proceeding or his
agent.—Statements made by a party to the proceeding, or
by an agent to any such party, whom the Court regards,
under the circumstances of the case, as expressly or
impliedly authorized by him to make them, are
admissions.
⚫ By suitor in representative character.—Statements made by
parties to suits, suing or sued in a representative character, are
not admissions, unless they were made while the party making
them held that character.
⚫ Statements made by—
⚫ (1) Party interested in subject-matter.—persons who have any
proprietary or pecuniary interest in the subject-matter of the
proceeding, and who make the statement in their character of
persons so interested, or
⚫ (2) Person from whom interest derived.—persons from whom
the parties to the suit have derived their interest in the
subject-matter of the suit, are admissions, if they are made
during the continuance of the interest of the persons making
the statements
⚫ Section 19 - Admissions by persons whose position must be
proved as against party to suit.—Statements made by
persons whose position or liability, it is necessary to prove as
against any party to the suit, are admissions, if such statements
would be relevant as against such persons in relation to such
position or liability in a suit brought by or against them, and if
they are made whilst the person making them occupies such
position or is subject to such liability.
⚫ Illustration
⚫ A undertakes to collect rents for B. B sues A for not collecting
rent due from C to B. A denies that rent was due from C to B.
A statement by C that he owed B rent is an admission, and is a
relevant fact as against A, if A denies that C did owe rent to B.
⚫ Section 20 - Admissions by persons expressly referred
to by party to suit.—Statements made by persons to
whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for
information in reference to a matter in dispute are
admissions.
⚫ Illustration
⚫ The question is, whether a horse sold by A to B is sound.
A says to B—"Go and ask C. C knows all about it”. C’s
statement is an admission.
⚫ The effects of sections 18, 19 and 20, when put together, are
that the admissions of following parties become relevant:
⚫ 1. Parties to the suit
⚫ 2. Agents of parties
⚫ 3. Persons occupying representative character
⚫ 4. Statements of third parties.
⚫ This category will include the statements of the following
parties:
⚫ 4A. Persons having pecuniary or proprietary interest.
⚫ 4B. Persons from whom the parties derived their interest or
title.
⚫ 4C. Persons whose position is in issue or is relevant.
⚫ 4D. Persons expressly referred to.
⚫ 1. Parties to the suit or proceeding (Sec 18)
⚫ All statements of a party to a suit relating to the facts which
suggest some inference as to a relevant fact or a fact in issue
are relevant.
⚫ The statement of a party whether civil or criminal, is of course
bound by his own admission.

⚫ Since every plaintiff has a pecuniary interest in the subject

matter of the suit, the statement of co-plaintiff may be held to
be binding against the others.

⚫ Tirkha vs Murari (AIR 1935 A 720) – An admission made by

one plaintiff is of considerable evidentiary value against his
co-plaintiff, though not conclusive.
⚫ A statement made by a party in the pleading cannot be evidence in
subsequent proceedings before a court of law unless it amounts to an
admission. That is, whatever is stated in the pleading needs to be
proved, other than an admission.

⚫ A statement made by a defendant in another suit may be used as an

admission within the meaning of this section – Hurrish vs Prosunna (22
WR 303)

⚫ A defendant will be bound by his statement only to the extent of his

own interest. In a suit for declaration of ownership and possession against
certain persons, one of them in his written statement conceded the plaintiffs
claim. That was held to be no evidence against his co-defendants –
Braham Raj Singh v/s Braham Raj Devi, AIR 1982 HP 57.

⚫ An admission is the best evidence only against the party who has made
it.
⚫ An admission made by a witness cannot be regarded as an admission
made by the party who called him.
⚫ 2. Agents of parties (Sec 18)
⚫ The statement of an agent of a party are relevant as
admission against the party provided the court regards,
under the circumstances of the case, the agents to be
expressly or impliedly authorized by the party to make
the statement.

⚫ PARTNER OF A FIRM - According to the law of

partnership an admission or representation made by a
partner concerning the affairs of the firm is evidence
against the firm, if it is made in the ordinary course of
business. The acknowledgment of a debt by a partner is an
admission against the firm.
⚫ Kowsulliah Sundari Dasi vs Mukta Sundari Dasi – (1885)11
Cal 588 – where several persons are engaged in one common
business or dealing, a statement made by one of them with
reference to any transaction which forms part of their joint
business, has always been held admissible as evidence against
the others.

⚫ ADVOCATE - The position of a lawyer is that a statement as

to facts made by him with the express or implied authority of
his client is an admission against the client.
⚫ In Khajah Abdool Gunee v/s Gour Monee Debia (1868) 9 WR
(Civil) 375 Admission of facts made by a pleader in a conduct
of a suit on his client’s behalf are binding on the client. But
apart from such authority a lawyer has no right to admit fact or
liability against his client.
⚫ 3. Parties suing or sued in a representative character – (Sec
18)

⚫ TRUSTEE/EXECUTOR - When a party sues or is sued in a

representative capacity e.g., trustee, executor, administrator,
manager etc, his representative capacity is distinct from his
ordinary capacity, and only admissions made in the former
capacity are receivable whereas statements made before he
acquired the representative character are inadmissible.

⚫ Any statement made by him during the time he holds such

character is an admission against the party whose
representative he is.
 STATEMENT OF THIRD PARTIES
⚫ 4a. Admissions by persons who have any proprietary or pecuniary
interest (S 18(1))

⚫ When several persons are jointly interested in the subject matter of a suit, an
admission by one of these persons is receivable not only against himself
but also against the others.
⚫ An admission by a joint owner is receivable in evidence against the other
joint owners.

⚫ “But in a tenancy matter, an admission made by the tenant’s brother was not
relevant because he had no pecuniary interest in the subject matter of the
tenancy” – Sri Chand Gupta vs Gulzar Singh AIR 1992 SC123

⚫ Admission by a party is not possible after parting with his interest in the
property. – Chironji lal v/s Khatoon Bi AIR 1995 MP 238
⚫ 4b. Admissions by persons from whom the parties to the suit
have derived their interest/ Privies (Sec 18(2))
⚫ This clause indicates that there ought to be a privity i.e., mutual or
successive relationship to the same right of property.

⚫ Predecessor in title – persons from whom the parties to the suit

have derived their interest in the subject matter of the suit,
statements from such persons become relevant provided they are
made during the continuance of their interest (Sec 18(2)).

⚫ Privies are of the following kinds:

⚫ Privies in blood – heir, ancestor or coparceners
⚫ Privies in law – executor and testator, administrator and person
dying intestate.
⚫ Privies in estate or interest – vendor and purchaser, lessor and lessee,
donor and donee, landlord and tenant etc
⚫ Admissions are relevant if made during the
continuance of the interest of the persons making the
statement.
⚫ Admissions of one person are also evidence against others
in respect of privity between them.

⚫ Nirmala vs Rukmini Bai AIR 1994 Kant 247, where the

deceased father of the plaintiff had admitted that the
defendant was his second legally wedded wife and her
children were his legitimate children, the admission was
binding on the plaintiff.
ADMISSIONS BY STRANGERS
⚫ Sections 19 and 20 are an exception to the rule that
statements made by strangers to the proceedings are not
admissible as against the parties.

⚫ Admissions by third persons are sometimes known as

‘Occasions admissions’.

⚫ These sections add to the category of persons whose statements

might amount to admissions. The section is based on the
principle that where the right or liability of a party to a suit
depends upon the liability of a third person, any statement
by that third person about his liability is an admission
against the parties.
⚫ 4c. Person whose position or liability is necessary to
prove as against any party to the suit, if statements are
made during the continuance of such position or liability,
and such as would be relevant as against such persons in
relation or liability in a suit brought by or against them
(Sec 19).

⚫ Illustration to sec 19 – A(rent collector) undertakes to

collect rents for B(owner). B sues A for not collecting rent
due from C(tenant) to B.
⚫ A denies that rent was due from C to B. A statement by C
that he owed B rent is an admission, and is a relevant fact
as against A, if A denies that C did owe rent to B.
⚫ 4d. Person to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for
information in reference to a matter in dispute (Section 20). –
REFERENCE

⚫ This is the second exception to the general rule that admissions of

strangers are not admissible. If a man refers another upon any
particular business to a third person, he is bound by what this third
person says or does concerning it, as much as if that had been said or
done by him.

⚫ When a party refers to a third person for some information or

an opinion on a matter in dispute, the statement made by the
third person is receivable as admissions against the person
referring.
⚫ Admissions by the referees are relevant but not conclusive, unless
they fall within the rule of estoppel enacted in section 115 of the Act.
⚫ In a criminal case, the accused referred a constable to his
wife for information. It was held that the list of property
prepared by his wife as given to the police, was treated as
an admission of possession by the husband – R v/s
Mallary (1884) 13 QBD 33.

⚫ Illustration: The question is, whether a horse sold by A to

B is sound. A says to B—"Go and ask C. C knows all
about it”. C’s statement is an admission. (PROBLEM
QUESTION)
Section 21
⚫ PARTY PROVING HIS OWN STATEMENTS
⚫ Proof of admissions against persons making them, and by
or on their behalf.—Admissions are relevant and may be
proved as against the person who makes them, or his
representative in interest; but they cannot be proved by or on
behalf of the person who makes them or by his representative
in interest, except in the following cases:—

⚫ (1) An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person

making it, when it is of such a nature that, if the person making
it were dead, it would be relevant as between third persons
under section 32.
⚫ (2) An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the
person making it, when it consists of a statement of the
existence of any state of mind or body, relevant or in
issue, made at or about the time when such state of mind
or body existed, and is accompanied by conduct rendering
its falsehood improbable.

⚫ (3) An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the

person making it, if it is relevant otherwise than as an
admission.
⚫ Illustrations
⚫ (a) The question between A and B is, whether a certain deed is or is
not forged, A affirms that it is genuine, B that it is forged. A may
prove a statement by B that the deed is genuine, and B may prove a
statement by A that the deed is forged; but A cannot prove a
statement by himself that the deed is genuine, nor can B prove a
statement by himself that the deed is forged.

⚫ (b) A, the Captain of a ship, is tried for casting her away. Evidence is
given to show that the ship was taken out of her proper course. A
produces a book kept by him in the ordinary course of his business,
showing observations alleged to have been taken by him from day to
day, and indicating that the ship was not taken out of her proper
course. A may prove these statements, because they would be
admissible between third parties, if he were dead, under section 32,
clause (2).
⚫ (c) A is accused of a crime committed by him at Calcutta. He
produces a letter written by himself and dated at Lahore on that day,
and bearing the Lahore post-mark of that day. The statement in the
date of the letter is admissible, because, if A were dead, it would be
admissible under section 32, clause (2).

⚫ (d) A is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be

stolen. He offers to prove that he refused to sell them below their
value. A may prove these statements, though they are admissions,
because they are explanatory of conduct influenced by facts in issue.

⚫ (e) A is accused of fraudulently having in his possession counterfeit

coin which he knew to be counterfeit. He offers to prove that he
asked a skilful person to examine the coin, as he doubted whether it
was counterfeit or not, and that the person did examine it and told
him it was genuine. A may prove these facts for the reasons stated in
the last preceding illustration
⚫ Admission is a statement suggesting any inference as to
any fact in issue or relevant fact.

⚫ As section 17 does not require that the statement must be

self-harming, it only requires that the statement should
suggest some inference as to the fact in issue or the
relevant fact, it does not matter even if the statement is in
favour of the declarant.
SCOPE
⚫ GENERAL RULE
⚫ Statements made by a person may be proved only when they are
against him.
⚫ No man should be at liberty to make evidence for himself through
his own statements granted this facility every litigant would
construct a favorable case of his own statements.

⚫ For e.g., The question between A and B is, whether a certain deed
is or is not forged, A affirms that it is genuine, B that it is forged.
A may prove a statement by B that the deed is genuine, and B may
prove a statement by A that the deed is forged; but A cannot prove a
statement by himself that the deed is genuine, nor can B prove a
statement by himself that the deed is forged.
EXCEPTIONS
⚫ Sec 21 has given 3 exceptions to this general rule , wherein
person making admission may use it at the trial and may derive
benefit out of it.

⚫ 1. When the statement should have been relevant as dying

declaration or as that of a deceased person under sec 32 (sec
21(1))– section 32 deals with the statement of persons who have died
or who otherwise cannot come before the court.
⚫ This exception states that an admission may be proved by or on
behalf of the person making it, when it is of such a nature that, if the
person making it were dead, it would be relevant as between third
persons under section 32.
⚫ In circumstances stated in sec 32 such a statement can be proved
by the maker himself if he is still alive.
Illustration (b)
⚫ A, the Captain of a ship, is tried for casting her away. Evidence is given to
show that the ship was taken out of her proper course.
⚫ A produces a book kept by him in the ordinary course of his business,
showing observations alleged to have been taken by him from day to day,
and indicating that the ship was not taken out of her proper course.
⚫ A may prove these statements, because they would be admissible between
third parties, if he were dead, under section 32, clause (2).

⚫ Now if the litigation was between the ship owner and the insurance
company and the question was whether the ship was lost due to
negligence or otherwise and the captain is dead, the contents of his
book would have been relevant. Here the captain can prove the contents
of his diary though they operate in his favour.
Illus (c)
⚫ A is accused of a crime committed by him at Calcutta. He
produces a letter written by himself and dated at Lahore
on that day, and bearing the Lahore post-mark of that day.

⚫ The statement in the date of the letter is admissible,

because, if A were dead, it would be admissible under
section 32, clause (2) – statement made in the ordinary
course of business. This is also relevant under sec 11(1) as
being the evidence of an inconsistent fact.
⚫ 2. Statements as to bodily feeling or state of mind [Section
21(2)]
⚫ The state of a man’s mind or body is relevant under section 14;
and statements narrating such facts indicating the state of mind
or body may be proved on behalf of a person narrating them.
But such statements should have been made at or about the
time when such state of mind or body existed.

⚫ Example
⚫ A executes a deed of gift in B’s favor.
⚫ After a year or so, A files a suit against B to cancel the said gift
deed, alleging that at the time of executing the said deed, he
was seriously ill, so much so that he could not understand the
contents of the said gift deed. (contd..)
Contd..
⚫ In this case, the question would be whether at the time of execution of the
gift deed, the state of mind and body of A was healthy enough so that he
might have understood the contents of the gift deed.
⚫ One day before the execution of the gift deed A had written a letter to C,
his friend, alleging that he was losing the balance of mind and was
suffering from some severe disease which doctors of his town could not
diagnose. He also had asked C, in the letter, to bring an expert doctor from
his city.
⚫ The doctor came that very evening and prescribed medicines for A and
charged him Rs. 1000/- for his fees and price of medicine.
⚫ This letter of B though his own statement will be allowed to be proved
by A because it was made at the time when the state of mind and body
existed and also the subsequent conduct of A in getting advice of the
doctor and paying a very heavy sum for the treatment rendered its
falsehood improbable.
⚫ 3. When otherwise relevant [Section 21(3)]
⚫ The last exception is that a person may prove his own
statement when it is otherwise relevant under any of the
provisions relating to relevancy.

⚫ In many cases in which a statement is relevant not

because it is an admission but because it establishes the
existence or non-existence of a relevant fact or a fact in
issue. In all such cases a party can prove his own
statements.
⚫ X brought a suit against his son for recovery of possession of
land which stood in the name of the son, alleging that the same
was acquired benami by him.
⚫ The son alleged that the land was purchased for him by his
paternal grandfather.
⚫ X produced a mortgage bond executed by him long before
the date of purchase of the land in the suit, in which he
described his father as dead.
⚫ It was held that the statement made by X in the mortgage bond
was admissible in evidence under sec 21, sub clause 3, as this
statement was admissible under sec 11(2).
⚫ Thus this clear that this clause is intended to apply to the cases
in which the statement is sought to be used in evidence
otherwise than as an admission.
⚫ Illustration (d) A is accused of receiving stolen goods
knowing them to be stolen. He offers to prove that he refused
to sell them below their value. A may prove these statements,
though they are admissions, because they are explanatory of
conduct influenced by facts in issue.

⚫ (e) A is accused of fraudulently having in his possession

counterfeit coin which he knew to be counterfeit. He offers to
prove that he asked a skilful person to examine the coin, as
he doubted whether it was counterfeit or not, and that the
person did examine it and told him it was genuine. A may
prove these facts for the reasons stated in the last preceding
illustration.
SECTION 22 and 22A
⚫ Section 22 of Evidence Act "When oral admissions as to contents
of documents are relevant"
⚫ Oral admissions as to the contents of a documents are not relevant,
unless and until the party proposing to prove them shows that he is
entitled to give secondary evidence of the contents of such document
under the rules herein after contained, or unless the genuineness of a
document produced is in question.

⚫ Section 22A of Evidence Act "When oral admission as to

contents of electronic records are relevant"
Oral admissions as to the contents of electronic records are not
relevant, unless the genuineness of the electronic record produced is
in question.
⚫ Under the provisions of the Evidence Act the contents of the
documents are proved either by primary evidence or by
secondary evidence.
⚫ According to Section 64, the document must be proved by
primary evidence, i.e., by producing the document itself.
⚫ In absence of primary evidence it can be proved by
secondary evidence under section 65.

⚫ Section 91 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 lays down the

provision that when evidence related to contracts, grants and
other depositions of the property is reduced as a document,
then no evidence is required to be given for proof of those
matters except the document itself.
⚫ Section 22 lays down that the contents of the documents
can be proved by the documents itself and not by oral
evidence or parol evidence (refers to extraneous evidence
such as an oral agreement).

⚫ In case the document is registered then except in the

case of a will it is not necessary to call an attesting
witness, unless the execution has been specifically denied
by the person by whom it purports to have been executed.

⚫ Where the original contract is available to ascertain the

quantum of damages there is no question of letting in
secondary evidence.
⚫ Section 22, accordingly, states that oral admission as to the
contents of a document are excluded by this section.

⚫ They will however be relevant only when -

⚫ 1. The secondary evidence of the document can be given under
sec 65.

⚫ For eg:
⚫ when the original has been destroyed or lost, or when the party
offering evidence of its contents cannot, for any other reason not
arising from his own default or neglect, produce it in reasonable
time;
⚫ when the original is in possession of the opposite party etc;
⚫ As per sec 63, oral accounts of the contents of a document given
by some person who has himself seen it, is considered as one of the
forms of secondary evidence, among others.
⚫ 2. Such admissions are also admissible when the
genuineness of the document, (i.e., if a
fabricated/forged document) produced is in question.

⚫ If the genuiness of the document is challenged, Sec 22 of

the Act permits oral evidence as to its genuineness only.
SECTION23
⚫ Admissions in civil cases, when relevant
⚫ In civil cases no admission is relevant, if it is made either
upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be
given, or under circumstances from which the Court can
infer that the parties agreed together that evidence of it
should not be given.

⚫ Explanation.—Nothing in this section shall be taken to

exempt any barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil from
giving evidence of any matter of which he may be
compelled to give evidence under section 126.
⚫ It is very often found that the litigating parties, by
negotiations, want to settle their disputes amicably,
and the negotiations usually takes place out of the
Court.

⚫ “Very often for the purpose of buying peace and settling

disputes by a compromise people made so many
settlements, if such settlements are allowed to be proved
in court,” it will become impossible for people to reach
any compromise. Section 23 provides protection for
negotiation.
⚫ When one of the parties to the dispute writes to the other
making an offer for settlement in certain terms he may
stipulate that in case his offer is not accepted his letter is
not to be used against him as an admission of liability.”

⚫ Such letter of communications made “without prejudice”

and is not accepted to be admissible as evidence.
⚫ “The evidence as to negotiation of compromise and the
statements made during such negotiations are generally without
prejudice.

⚫ It is ordinarily against public policy to admit such evidence.

The statements made in the compromise petition even if treated
as valid admissions, cannot be treated as evidence when the
compromise fails.”

⚫ “Confidential overtures of pacification and any other offers

or propositions between litigating parties, expressly or
impliedly made ‘without prejudice’ are excluded on grounds
of public policy,” otherwise the clever and ingenious man may
frustrate the spirit of law when he knows the weak points of the
case of his opponent.
⚫ For example, if parties are to be prejudiced by efforts to
compromise, it will be impossible to attempt any amicable
arrangement of differences.

⚫ Admission or statements which are proved to be wrong or

mistaken are not binding on the party making it. Lord
Mansfield once observed that “all men must be permitted to
buy peace without prejudice to them should the offer not
succeed, such offers being made to stop litigation without
regard to the question whether anything is due or not.”

⚫ Thus the letter marked “without prejudice” protects

subsequent and even previous letter in the same
correspondence.
⚫ According to Section 23 an admission will not be relevant if it is
given on condition, either express or implied, that the evidence of
it is not to be given.

⚫ It is strictly confined to the cases where there is dispute and

negotiation for settlement of dispute between parties is going on.

⚫ For example, the plaintiff was injured while he was getting down
from the train when the train just started to move at the time of his
getting down. The plaintiff filed a suit for damages. The railway
authorities issued damage certificate containing mark “without
prejudice” requesting plaintiff to be examined by the Railway
doctor. The damage certificate cannot be used as evidence when
a correspondence relating to a dispute was initiated by a letter
marked “without prejudice.” The protection will apply to whole
proceeding even if the reply-letter is not so marked.
⚫ The privilege of ‘without prejudice’ will continue even
after the settlement and cannot be disclosed either by
the parties or by any third persons.

⚫ The principle of “without prejudice” has no

application in criminal cases.

⚫ Similarly, if the statement is not related to the purpose

of negotiation it is also not protected.
⚫ Explanation:
⚫ Under explanation the professional communications made
by a client to his legal adviser are generally protected from
disclosure under section 126.

⚫ But, communications made to the legal adviser in

furtherance of a illegal acts, crime or fraud are not
protected.

⚫ The court can compel the legal adviser to give evidence of

any statement made for illegal purpose.
****