Skip to content

CS Executive · Jurisprudence, Interpretation and General Laws · Law relating to Evidence

In a civil suit, Rohit made a statement about a debt to Sameer, but expressly said it was made on the condition that it would not be used as evidence. Under the Adhiniyam, what is the position of that statement?

The statement is not relevant. Section 21 says that in civil cases an admission is not relevant if it was made on an express condition that evidence of it should not be given, or in circumstances from which the court infers the parties agreed that it would not be given.

  1. AIt is relevant as an admission because it concerns a debt
  2. BIt is not relevant, since it was made on an express condition that evidence of it is not to be givenCorrect
  3. CIt is relevant only if Sameer is an advocate
  4. DIt is relevant only if it is made in writing

Explanation

Section 21 provides that in civil cases no admission is relevant if made upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be given, or where the court can infer the parties agreed it would not be given. Rohit's stated condition therefore makes it irrelevant. Subject matter alone does not override the condition.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Law relating to Evidence shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Law relating to EvidenceFree diagnostic mock

More Law relating to Evidence questions