Judgment text0% read
Browse the contents
Read the full judgment on the Supreme Court website ↗
Case information
| Court | Supreme Court of Bangladesh — High Court Division |
|---|---|
| Case reference | First Appeal 321/2014 |
| Case-reference year | 2014 |
| Case type | First Appeal |
| Court website upload date | 17-JUN-26 |
The case-reference year is not the judgment year. The court website upload date is not a judgment date.
Official index description (excerpt)
Source: Supreme Court official index.
The foregoing views of the various Apex Courts clearly indicate that an admission made by a party in a pleading may be treated as evidence against that party in another suit, not only in relation to a different subject matter but also against a different opponent. However, such an admission cannot be regarded as conclusive proof, and it remains open to the party concerned to establish that it is untrue. An admission, therefore, constitutes substantive evidence, subject to rebuttal by its maker. Where the maker fails to rebut its presumptive value, the opposing party is entitled to rely upon and derive benefit from it, irrespective of whether the admission appears in a plaint or a written statement. However, if it is established that the plaint or written statement containing the admission is a forged document, the admission contained therein cannot be used against the party concerned. The decision cited above clearly establishes that where a plaintiff is not a party to a decree or instrument relating to a property, a suit for a simple declaration of title to that property, without
[Excerpt ends; the complete index description is retained in the catalogue JSON.]