According to Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 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.
Section 17 IEA defines “Admissions” but it is not complete definition. It is complete when it is read with other provisions of the Chapter especially Ss. 18 to 20.
Essential Ingredients of Admission:
- is a statement, oral or documentary or contained in electronic form;
- is a statement which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact;
- must be made any of the persons mentioned in the Act (Ss. 18 to 20);
- is made by any person under the circumstances have been mentioned in the Act;
- must be taken as a whole;
- The law of Admissions is exceptions to the law of hearsay; and
- Admissions of facts only bind persons making them.
Example:
A, files a suit against B alleging that B is the last male owner’s daughter’s son and that he (A) is the last male owner’s sapinda. B files a document in which A admits that B to be the daughter’s son of the last male holder. That document is the admission made by the A.
Strictly speaking, the general principles concerning admission has been dealt with in Sections 17 to 23 and 31, whereas Sections 24 to 30 are also admission, but it is used as confession.
Kinds of Admissions:
There as two types of admissions viz., (1) Judicial, and (2) Extra-judicial Admissions.
Judicial Admission:
The judicial or formal admission is addressed to the court and is the part of the proceeding. It is made on the record in the file of the court. The judicial admission may be made by the party in his pleading, or by stipulation, or by statement in open court.
In Bishwanath Prasad v Dwarka Prasad, AIR 1974 SC 117 case, the Supreme Court opined that “admissions, if true and clear, are by far the best proof of the fact admitted.” Admissions as defined in Sections 17 and 20 and fulfilling requirements of Section 21 are substantive evidence, propio vigare (of or by its own force independently).
Extra-judicial Admission:
The extra-judicial or informal admission is statement of fact made by the party previously in course of life or business which is inconsistent with the facts to be established at the trial. The extrajudicial admissions are called evidential admissions. The Evidence Act only deals with this sort of admission in Sections 17 to 23.
In Bessela v Stern, (1877), L. R. 2 C. P. D. 265 case, where the girl said to the boy “you always promised to marry me and you did not keep your words.” The boy did not deny the allegation, but he offered her some money. The boy’s silence as to promise was held to be admission.
Relevancy of Admission:
The admission is relevant on the following reasons:
Admissions as waiver of proof: If a party has admitted a fact, it dispenses with the necessity of proving the fact against him. It operates as a waiver of proof. An admission, as an admission is not conclusive against the person making it, but it may operate as an estoppel under section 115 of the Evidence Act.
In Queen Empress v. Tribhovandas Manekchand, (1885) ILR 9 Bom 131 case, the Court held that a confession which is inadmissible in a criminal proceeding may be used as an admission in a civil proceeding.
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.
Admissions as evidence of contradictory statements:
Where there is contraction 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.
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. Whatever a party says in evidence against himself may be presumed to be so.
Evidentiary Value of Admission:
According to Section 31 of the Indian Evidence act, 1872 admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted but they operate as estoppels under the provisions herein contained.
Admissions under Indian Evidence Act 1872 (sec 17-23) are only piece of evidence. They are not conclusive proof of the fact admitted but they operate as estoppel under sec 115-117 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Relevancy of Admission in Civil Suits:
According to Section 23 of the Evidence Act, in civil cases no admission is relevant, if it is made:
- upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be given.
- under circumstances from which the Court can infer that the parties agreed together that evidence of it should not be given.
Who Can Make Admission?
Sections 18 to 20 of the Act lays down the provisions relating to persons to make admissions. An admission is relevant. if it is made by
- A party to the proceeding (Civil or Criminal) (S. 18); or
- An agent authorized by such party (S. 18); or
- A Party suing or being sued in a representative character making admission while holding such character (S. 18); or
- A person who has a proprietary interest in the subject matter of the suit during the continuance of such interest (S. 18); or
- A person from whom the parties to the suit have derived their interest in the subject-matter of the suit during the continuance of such interest (S. 18); or
- A person whose position is it necessary to prove in a suit, if such statements would be relevant in a suit brought by or against himself (S. 19); or
- A person to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information in reference to a matter in dispute (S. 20).
Proof of Admissions Against Persons Making Them, and by or on Their Behalf.
Section 21 deals with the proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf. This section brings forth general principles of admission that admissions made are relevant and may be proved against the person who makes the admission and his representative in interest. Admission should be clear if they are used against the person making them. What a party himself admits to be true may reasonably be presumed be to so and until that presumption is rebutted the fact admitted should be taken to be established The person against whom admission is proved is at liberty to show it was untrue. Any self-serving statement made under this section would be considered irrelevant unless it falls under the ambit of general exception as provided.
When Oral Admissions as to Contents of Documents are Relevant?
Section 22 of the Act, provides that oral evidence as to contents of documents is inadmissible unless party proposing to give such evidence can make out a case for admission of secondary admission under sec 65(2) or genuineness of a document produced is in question.
Conclusion:
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 mentioned in Ss. 18-20 of the Evidence Act. Admissions are not considered as a conclusive proof but may be used as an estoppel under section 31. This section gives evidentiary value to the admissions made under Section 17-30 of The Indian Evidence Act. Any admission, until and unless operated as an estoppel is not considered as conclusive, but is rebuttable. Admissions are a substantive piece of an evidence and should be taken as a whole.