Admissions

Section 17 to 23
Definition of admission 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 by any of the persons, and under the
circumstances, hereinafter mentioned.
The nature and relevance of admission stated in Sec 31
Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop- Admissions are not
conclusive proof of the matters admitted but they may operate as
estoppels under the provisions hereinafter contained.
This implied that when an admission is proved against a person, he is
still allowed to show the admission was wrongly made. Evidence to
rebut, or prove that it was wrongly made may be given by the person
who made the statement (which is being proved against him) may be
given.
Estoppel of admission When the person to whom an admission is
made believes it and acts upon it; the maker of the admission is
prohibited or estopped from showing that the admission is wrongly
made. However, as per section 31, this does not change the fact that
admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted. Therefore,
the estoppel prevents the person who allegedly made the admission from
denying the fact that he made it.
Denial of statements made by party A in an earlier plaint is
permissible in a subsequent plaint. BASANT SINGH v. JANKI
SINGH SC holds that - Opposing parties may use these statements from the
previous plaint against party A, but party is entitled to show that the
statements were not true. Also, these admissions in prior proceedings
cannot be regarded as conclusive. The court also held that all statements
made in the previous plaint are admissible as evidence though the court
is not bound to accept them as correct. Some of the statement may be
rejected as well.
The general rule regarding admissions is that an admission must be selfharming (exceptions being stated in section 21). The words underlined
hereunder are where this rule is inferredSection 21 - 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.
Thus, it is only under these exceptions that a person may use an
admission made by a person in his favor as evidenceSub Clause 2- The statement to be proved by the person making them,
in his own favor-

Must be made when the state of mind or body existed,

Must be of a regarding existence of a state of mind or body
relevant or in issue.
Must be accompanied by conduct which renders the
falsehood of the admission as improbable

Sub clause 3 When a statement made in an account book maintained

by a party proves the existence or non-existence of a disputed fact, the
person maintaining the account book may produce it as evidence and it
shall be considered relevant, despite it being self-serving, due to the
provisions of section 34.
Section 18
Section 18 is self-explanatory. It basically states who can make an
admission for the purposes of a proceeding in court. It includes the
accused in a criminal case and both parties in a civil case. It includes
admissions made by a partner, provided that the admission was made
during the subsistence of the partnership, unless made by an ex-partner
in regard to a matter, which came up while he was still a partner. The

person always has to be making the statement in his capacity as a

representative of the party to the suit. Since agency is a contractual
relationship, minors cannot be an agent. A guardian to a minor cannot
come within the ambit of agent. Neither can co-defendants. A principle
and surety are also not included in this phrase.

Section 18 (1) - Only Admissions made during the continuance of

proprietary or pecuniary interest is relevant. Includes co-defendants.
Section 18(2) Derived interest in the subject matter of the proceeding,
example, an heir to a property. Based on the principle that an interested
party would not make a statement against himself during the continuance
of such interest. The derived interest must be strictly established. The
person from whom the interest is derived must make the admission.
Sections 19 and 20 are exceptions to the rule of privity, since total
strangers make them but in the circumstances mentioned in the two
sections, their statements become relevant.
Section 19 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.
The admission has to be made -

By persons whose position or liability it is necessary to

prove as against any party to the suit
The statement made has to be relevant as against a party to
a suit, with regard to the position or liability of the party to
the suit to a third party.
If they are made whilst the person making them occupies
such position or is subject to such liabilityThe statement
is only relevant if the person making it is still occupying
the position or is still subject to the liability. Example, if
the question is whether A was a collector for a landlord B,
then a statement made by a tenant of B with regard to A
being a collector is relevant.

Section 20 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.
In effect, this allows statements made by a third party against the person
who had made the reference to the third party in order to prove a fact. In
other words, if in the course of proceedings under A and B, if A refers to
C in order to ascertain a matter in dispute, only statements made by C as
against A are relevant. This is also in conformity with the rule that
statements made by a person can only be proved against him, except in
this case, where statements made by a third party (C) who has been
referred to by A which incriminate A are relevant as the person who had
been referred to in good faith chose to make an admission as against A.
This is because any third party can be referred to by a person in order to
help prove his side of the story, however, if the third party chooses to be
impartial in the proceedings, any statements made against the party
making the reference regarding the matter in dispute is relevant. Any
deviation from this would result in a misuse of the reference to a third
party.
Statements- Oral or Documentary
If the admission is an oral statement then the person making it can be
asked whether he made the statement. If the person denies it, one may
prove him wrong through someone who had heard him make the
statement.
When admissions are irrelevant
Section 22When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevantOral admissions as to the contents of a document 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 hereinafter contained, or unless the genuineness of a document
produced is in question.
Section 23Admissions 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. This section makes admissions made in the course of an attempt
to reach an out-of-court settlement or negotiation irrelevant for the
purpose of any proceedings between the same parties with regard to the
subject matter in question. This is because they would bring prejudice
against the party.