Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.25 seconds)

Khan Bahadur Shapoor Fredoom Mazda vs Durga Prosad Chamaria And Others on 1 March, 1961

The statement providing foundation for a plea of acknowledgement must relate to a present subsisting liability, though the exact nature or the specific character of the said liability may not be indicated in words. The words used in the acknowledgement must indicate the existence of jural relationship between the parties such as that of debtor and creditor. The intention to attempt such jural relationship must be apparent. However, such intention can be inferred by implication from the nature of the admission and need not be expressed in words. A clear statement containing acknowledgement of liability can imply the intention to admit jural relationship of debtor and creditor. Though oral evidence in lieu of or making a departure from the statement sought to be relied on as acknowledgement is excluded but surrounding circumstances can always be considered. Courts generally lean in favour of a liberal construction of such statements though a acknowledgement should not be inferred where there is no admission so as to fasten liability on the maker of the statement by an involved or far-fetched process of reasoning See: Shapoor Freedom Mazda vs Durga Prosad Chamaria & Ors., AIR 1961 SC 1236 and Ms.Lakshmiratan Cotton Mills Co.Ltd. Etc. v. The Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. 1969(1) SCR 951. So long as the statement amounts to an admission , acknowledging the jural relationship and existence of liability, it is immaterial that the admission is accompanied by an assertion that nothing would be found due from the person making the admission or that on an account being taken something may be found due and payable to the person making the acknowledgement by the person to whom the statement is made.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 161 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document
1   2 Next