KSLU Solved Question Papers
Law of Evidence
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 8
2014 Dec Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 8 Law of Evidence 2014 Dec Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2014 Dec examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2014 Dec examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2014 Dec examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 13 questions answered
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1What is an 'Admission' ? Explain the relevancy of admissions in civil case.[16]
Answer
For full marks, cover: (1) what an admission is: section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and why a party's own words against his case are received; (2) the relevancy of admissions in a civil case, followed through one money suit stage by stage: before the suit (the party, his agent, persons with an interest, predecessors in title and referees, sections 18 to 20; oral admissions about documents, section 22; talks "without prejudice", section 23, which applies only in civil cases); in the pleadings (judicial admissions, section 58; judgment on admissions under Order XII rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Nagindas Ramdas); at the trial (proved against the maker, not by him, section 21; substantive evidence without confronting the maker, Bharat Singh v. Bhagirathi; read as a whole, Palvinder Kaur); at the decision (not conclusive, but may estop, section 31; B.L. Sreedhar); civil and criminal cases compared; a table; sections 15 to 21, 25 and 53 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 in a line; a conclusion.
Part 1: what an admission is
Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 defines an admission as "a statement, oral or documentary or contained in electronic form, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact". It must be made by one of the persons, and in the circumstances, that the Act goes on to name.
The law receives admissions for a simple reason. People do not usually say things against their own interest unless they are true. So a party's own words against his case are good evidence of the facts they admit.
Part 2: admissions in a civil suit, stage by stage
Take a single suit. Priya sues Kiran for Rs. 2,00,000, which she says she lent him. Kiran denies the loan. Admissions may arise at four stages of this case.
Stage 1: before the suit
Whose statements count (sections 18 to 20). Statements by these persons are admissions:
- a party to the suit, such as a text message from Kiran saying, "I will repay your two lakhs next month";
- his agent, whom the court regards as authorised to make the statement, such as Kiran's manager writing about the debt;
- a person with a proprietary or pecuniary interest in the subject matter, while he holds that interest;
- a person from whom a party derives his interest, such as the earlier owner of a property, while he held it;
- a person to whom a party has expressly referred for information on a disputed matter (section 20).
Oral admissions about documents (section 22). If the loan was made under a written agreement, Kiran's spoken words about what the agreement says are not relevant. The exceptions are where Priya is entitled to give secondary evidence of it, or its genuineness is in question.
Settlement talks (section 23). "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 in circumstances showing the parties agreed it should not be given. So if Kiran wrote "without prejudice: I can pay Rs. 1,50,000 to settle", Priya cannot use that letter as an admission of the debt. This rule applies only in civil cases. It lets parties negotiate freely.
Stage 2: in the pleadings
Judicial admissions (section 58). Facts that the parties admit at or before the hearing, in writing or in their pleadings, "need not be proved". Suppose Kiran's written statement admits receiving the money but pleads that it was a gift. The payment is then admitted, and only the gift is in dispute. Under its proviso, the court may still, in its discretion, require an admitted fact to be proved.
Judgment on admissions. Order XII rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 lets the court give judgment on admissions of fact made "either in the pleading or otherwise". It may do so "at any stage of the suit", without waiting for other questions to be decided.
Facts. In Nagindas Ramdas v. Dalpatram Ichharam, (1974) 1 SCC 242, a tenant compromised an eviction suit, admitting arrears of rent and the end of the tenancy. When the landlords executed the decree, he said it was a nullity.
Held. Judicial admissions stand on a higher footing than evidentiary ones. They are fully binding on the party, amount to a waiver of proof, and can by themselves found the parties' rights. Evidentiary admissions are not conclusive and can be shown to be wrong. The compromise admissions supported the decree.
Stage 3: at the trial
Against the maker, not for him (section 21). Admissions "are relevant and may be proved as against the person who makes them". Priya may prove Kiran's text message. Kiran cannot prove his own earlier statement that he never borrowed, save in the three cases section 21 allows. The first is where the statement would be relevant under section 32 if he were dead. The second is where it states his state of mind or body at the time, with supporting conduct. The third is where it is relevant otherwise than as an admission.
Substantive evidence, without confronting the maker.
Facts. In Bharat Singh v. Bhagirathi, AIR 1966 SC 405, plaintiffs sued for land, claiming a joint Hindu family with the defendant's late husband. The widow had admitted a joint family in certain documents. The High Court ignored those admissions because she had not been confronted with them in the witness box.
Held. Admissions are substantive evidence of the facts admitted, under sections 17 and 21, though not conclusive. They may be used whether or not the maker gave evidence or was confronted with them. Section 145 is a different matter: it deals with contradicting a witness. The trial court's decree was restored.
Read as a whole. An admission must be taken as a whole, not split into the useful and the useless. In Palvinder Kaur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1952 SC 354, the Supreme Court held that a court cannot accept the part of a statement against the maker and reject the part in his favour.
Stage 4: at the decision
Not conclusive, but may estop (section 31). Admissions "are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted but they may operate as estoppels". Kiran may explain that his message was about another debt, and the court weighs his explanation.
But if Priya acted on his admission to her loss, Kiran may be estopped. In B.L. Sreedhar v. K.M. Munireddy, (2003) 2 SCC 355, a father had consented to the re-grant of family land to his son, and stayed silent for years while it was sold. He was held estopped from challenging the sale. Estoppel needs a representation, reliance on it and detriment.
Admissions in civil and criminal cases compared
| Point | Civil case | Criminal case |
|---|---|---|
| Admissions by parties and agents | relevant (sections 18 to 21) | relevant against the accused, but confessions follow sections 24 to 30 |
| Settlement talks | excluded (section 23) | section 23 does not apply |
| Judicial admissions | waive proof (section 58); judgment on admissions (Order XII rule 6) | section 58 speaks of "any proceeding", but the court may require proof (its proviso) |
| Effect | not conclusive; may estop (section 31) | not conclusive |
The stages at a glance
| Stage | What may count as an admission | Rule |
|---|---|---|
| Before the suit | party's or agent's statements; statements of interested persons, predecessors, referees | sections 17 to 20 |
| Before the suit | oral words about a document | limited (section 22) |
| Stage | What may count as an admission | Rule |
|---|---|---|
| Before the suit | "without prejudice" offers | excluded in civil cases (section 23) |
| In the pleadings | facts admitted | need no proof (section 58; Order XII rule 6; Nagindas Ramdas) |
| At the trial | earlier admissions | against the maker; substantive (section 21; Bharat Singh) |
| At the decision | any admission | not conclusive; may estop (section 31; B.L. Sreedhar) |
Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Sections 17 to 23 are now sections 15 to 21 of the Adhiniyam, with section 22A merged into section 20. Section 31 is section 25 and section 58 is section 53.
Conclusion. An admission, under section 17 of the 1872 Act, is a statement made by a person the Act names. It suggests an inference about a fact in issue or relevant fact. In a civil case, admissions by a party, his agent, persons with an interest, predecessors and referees are relevant (sections 18 to 20). Oral admissions about documents are limited (section 22), and settlement offers made without prejudice are excluded (section 23). Admissions in the pleadings need no proof and may found a judgment (section 58; Order XII rule 6; Nagindas Ramdas). At the trial they are proved against the maker, not by him (section 21), and are substantive evidence without confronting him (Bharat Singh). They are not conclusive, but may estop the maker (section 31; B.L. Sreedhar).
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 8 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.