LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


Introduction:

The common law system gave rise to the concept of admission, which is now part of both the criminal and civil branches of the Indian court system. Admissions help matters be resolved quickly and with the least amount of litigation. It guarantees quick, easy, and affordable justice. This principle is included in the Code of Civil Procedure (hereafter CPC), which also gives the court freedom to rule based on the parties' admissions.

Meaning of Admission:

CPC doesn't provide an admission definition. According to Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, an admission is a statement that suggests an inference to a relevant fact or fact at question, whether it is stated orally, in writing, or electronically.

It is important to remember that the Indian Evidence Act's Section 23 outlines the situations in which an admission will not be relevant in civil trials. According to the Section, an admission will not be significant in civil actions if it is based on an express condition that no proof of it be provided or if it results from circumstances that allow the court to infer that the parties had agreed not to produce evidence of it.

According to Section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act, no proof is necessary where a fact has been admitted by the parties or their representatives. The caveat to the Section, however, indicates that the Court has the discretionary option to demand that such confessed facts be established in a different way than by such admission.

As a result, a fact that has been admitted by both parties need not be proven, and the court may assume it to be true. A fact would only be irrelevant in civil disputes if the parties had expressly or implyingly agreed that such evidence should not be presented. It is important to note that once the parties have admitted a fact, they are not allowed to later reject it. In the 2006 decision of Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. Union of India, it was decided that once the workers had acknowledged that they had been employed by a contractor, they could not afterwards change their minds.

Important provisions under order 12:

The CPC's Order 12 addresses admissions. According to Rule 1, a party may, in whole or in part, admit the opposing party's case by providing a notification. The disclosure must be made in writing.

A notice to admit or refuse to admit any document may be given to the opposite party in accordance with Rule 2. Within seven days of receiving notification, the opposing party must admit the document. The burden of footing the cost of proving the document will be on the party who refuses or neglects to admit the party on whom the notification is given.

It will be assumed that a document has been admitted if a notice of admission has been filed by one party and the other party does not expressly dispute the document or does not acknowledge it in his pleading or reply. Only when the opposing side is a disabled person does this not apply.

The court has the authority under Order 12 Rule 3A to request any party to admit a document and to record that party's admission or denial.

The caveat to Rule 4 makes it clear that admissions made as a result of a notice under one process cannot be utilised as evidence against the party making the admission in any other proceedings pertaining to another matter.

However, the costs associated with issuing a notice to admit such papers that are not required will be covered by the party issuing the notice.

Any oral or written admission made by the parties at any stage of the proceedings may be subject to review by the Courts under Order 12 Rule 6. Such an admission may be stated verbally or in writing in the pleading.

The Apex Court noted in the case of United Bank of India & Ors (2000) that Order 12, Rule 6 gives the court the authority to rule in favour of the plaintiff on the basis of an acknowledged claim. It is important to emphasise that the reach of this provision cannot be so narrowed that the plaintiff can get a favourable judgement based solely on the defendant's open admission.

It's important to remember that the Rule says the court "may" issue an order or judgement based on the admission. As a result, it is obvious that the legislative goal was to give the Court discretionary authority, and a decision based on an admission cannot be argued as a matter of right. The proviso to Order 8, Rule 5 further explains the legislative aim. The proviso states that the Court has the option to require the proof of an accepted fact by any other means, even though it has been admitted by an admission.

Case Law:

Karan Kapoor v. Madhuri Kumar (2022)

In this case, according to the Apex Court, the power under Order 12 Rule 6 should only be used in cases when the admission of documents or facts is unmistakable, categorical, and clear. The legislative purpose behind granting the Court this level of discretion was to allow the court to issue a ruling or decree based on admissions made by one party and acknowledged by the opposing party when the court was satisfied with the nature of the admission. The Court concluded that a complete trial was necessary to determine the opponent's chosen defence in the current instance. Trial was required to determine whether or not the defence was credible, and the parties had to be given the chance to present their own evidence. The verdict of the Trial Court was susceptible to being overturned since the confessions made in this case were neither categorical nor explicit.

Conclusion:

According to Order 12, the court has the option to issue a judgement based on the admissions made by the parties without addressing any of their objections. However, because this Rule's remedy is merely enabling and discretionary in character, it cannot be used as a matter of right. Any level of the procedures can result in a decision based on admissions.

While decrees and judgements based on admission expedite justice and conserve the court's valuable time, the courts must take proper consideration for the fact that these orders are not based on the case's merits, so this discretionary power must be used wisely and conspicuously


"Loved reading this piece by Dikshita More ?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"






Tags :


Category Others, Other Articles by - Dikshita More  



Comments


update