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 under circumstances from which the Court can infer that the parties agreed together that evidence of it should both be given.
Explanation
Nothing in this section shall be taken to exempt any barrister, pleader attorney or vakil from giving evidence of any matter of which he may be compelled to give evidence under section 126.
Section 23 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with the relevancy of admissions in civil cases, particularly when these admissions are made under specific conditions that suggest they were intended to be confidential or not to be used against the person making them. This section ensures that admissions made during certain discussions or negotiations, particularly settlement discussions, are not used unfairly against a party in court.
Explanation:
- Admissions in Civil Cases:
- In civil cases, an admission made by a party can generally be used as evidence against them. However, Section 23 provides an important exception to this rule.
- Express Condition:
- If an admission is made by a party with the express condition that it should not be used as evidence in court, then it is not relevant and cannot be admitted as evidence. For example, if two parties agree during negotiations that any admissions made during their discussions will remain confidential and not be used in court, these admissions are protected under this section.
- Inferred Agreement:
- Even if there is no express condition, if the circumstances suggest that the parties intended for the admission to remain confidential and not be used as evidence, the court can infer such an agreement. In such cases, the admission is also not relevant as evidence in court.
- Purpose:
- The purpose of Section 23 is to encourage open and honest negotiations and settlements in civil disputes. It allows parties to discuss and negotiate without fear that their words will be used against them in court if the negotiations fail.
Example:
Imagine a situation where A and B are involved in a civil dispute over property. During settlement negotiations, A admits to B, “I might have taken more land than I should have, but let’s settle this without going to court.” A also explicitly states, “This is off the record, and shouldn’t be used in court.”
- Express Condition: If A made the admission with the express condition that it would not be used as evidence, then this admission is not relevant and cannot be used against A in court under Section 23.
- Inferred Agreement: If the negotiations took place in a confidential setting, with both parties understanding that they were trying to reach a settlement and that anything said during the discussions would not be used in court, the court could infer that there was an agreement to keep these admissions confidential. In this case, the admission would also be protected under Section 23.
Significance:
Section 23 is significant because it protects the integrity of settlement negotiations in civil cases. It ensures that parties can discuss potential settlements openly, without the fear that their statements will later be used against them in court. This encourages parties to negotiate and settle disputes outside of court, which can save time and resources for both the parties and the legal system. By providing this protection, the section helps to facilitate amicable resolutions in civil matters.
