Supreme Court Dismisses Special Leave Petition Regarding Resignation Dispute — Oath Taken as Admission. Oath Taken Constituted Admission Under Section 20 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from a suit filed by K.M. Singh, a Finance Officer of the Association of Indian Universities, claiming that his resignation was involuntary due to fraud, coercion, and inducement. During the proceedings, Singh requested that two officers of the respondent take a special oath in a Gurudwara and Mandir, respectively, affirming that his resignation was not extracted under duress. The trial court allowed this, and after the oath was taken, dismissed that part of Singh's claim as withdrawn. Singh later sought to have the dismissal reversed, arguing that the repeal of the Oaths Act, 1873 by the Oaths Act, 1969 invalidated the special oath. The trial court and subsequently the High Court dismissed his revision petition, affirming that the oath taken constituted an admission under Section 20 of the Evidence Act. The Supreme Court upheld these decisions, stating that the oath taken was valid and amounted to an admission of the respondent's claim. The court emphasized that the repeal of the Oaths Act did not prevent parties from entering into contracts or making admissions. The special leave petition was dismissed without costs.

Headnote

A) Evidence Law - Admissions - Oath as Admission - Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 20 - The oath taken by the nominees of the plaintiff constituted an admission of the respondent's claim, as per the provisions of Section 20 of the Evidence Act. The court held that the special oath administered was valid and amounted to an admission, thus affirming the trial court's dismissal of the claim. (Paras 635-639).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the suit could be decided on the basis of a special oath after the repeal of the Oaths Act, 1873.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition, affirming the trial court's orders and holding that the special oath taken constituted an admission under Section 20 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Law Points

  • Evidentiary value of oaths
  • admissions under Evidence Act
  • validity of special oaths
  • repeal of Oaths Act
  • 1873
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

1992 LawText (SC) (04) 6

Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 10436 of 1991

1992-04-21

Yogeshwar Dayal, S.R. Pandian, K. Jayachandra Reddy

1992 AIR 1356, 1992 SCR (2) 630, 1992 SCC (3) 129

P.P. Rao, Rajindra Dhawan, Jitendra Sharma

K.M. Singh

Secretary, Association of Indian Universities and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil suit regarding the validity of resignation and its circumstances.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought to declare his resignation involuntary and to reverse the dismissal of part of his claim.

Filing Reason

Claim of resignation under duress, fraud, and coercion.

Previous Decisions

Trial court dismissed part of the claim based on the special oath taken by the respondents.

Issues

Validity of special oath after repeal of Oaths Act, 1873 Evidentiary value of admissions made under special oath

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the repeal of the Oaths Act invalidated the special oath. Respondents contended that the oath constituted an admission under Section 20 of the Evidence Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the special oath taken by the nominees of the plaintiff constituted an admission under Section 20 of the Indian Evidence Act, and the repeal of the Oaths Act, 1873 did not prevent the parties from entering into contracts or making admissions.

Judgment Excerpts

The oath taken by the two persons in pursuance of the offer of the petitioner amounted to an admission of the respondent’s claim on his part within the meaning of Section 20 of the Evidence Act. The orders of the Trial Court are therefore unassailable and the High Court has rightly dismissed the revision petition.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a suit claiming his resignation was involuntary. An application for a special oath was accepted, leading to a dismissal of part of the claim. Subsequent applications to reverse this dismissal were denied, leading to a revision petition and ultimately a special leave petition to the Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Section 20
  • Oaths Act, 1969: Section 9
  • Oaths Act, 1873:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petitions Challenging Rejection of Nomination Papers in Cooperative Society Election. Minor Defect of Non-Signing of Affidavit-B Held Curable Under Rule 21(2) of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies (Elections to Committee)...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Disposes Special Leave Petition in Negotiable Instruments Act Case Based on Consensual Settlement Terms. Court Accepted Fair Settlement Including Payment of 20% Deposited Amount and Rs.9.50 Lakhs in Installments, Clarifying No Impact on...