Section 21 lays down that, as a general rule, admissions are relevant, and may be proved against the person who makes them or his representative in interest, and if duly proved, though not conclusive, are sufficient evidence of the facts admitted. The effect usually given to admissions proved against persons who make them is destructive, and not constructive. Whether they are true or not does not matter.
Image Source: bimakscollege.com
The effective point is that they destroy the force of inconsistent statements made later. The person against whom an admission is proved is at liberty to show that it was mistaken or untrue. When an admission is duly proved, and the person against whom it is proved does not satisfy the Court that it was mistaken or untrue, the Court may decide the case in accordance with such admission. An erroneous admission does not bind the person making such admission.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The Supreme Court had held that a contractor’s bill which is expressly stated to be a final settlement of his demand for the work done, amounts to an admission against the contractor, who would be bound by it, unless satisfactory proof to the contrary is produced. (Central Coal Fields Ltd. v. Mining Constructions and Multi-contract Pvt. Ltd., (1982) 1 S.C.C. 415)