C.R. Shivaji vs C.B.Madhookar and others. Writ Petition 16288/2014 decided on 5 March 2019.
Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/265231/1/WP16288-14-05-03-2019.pdf
Relevant paragraphs: 19. A plain reading of the provisions of Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure clearly depicts that where admissions of fact have been made either in the pleading or otherwise, whether orally or in writing, the Court may at any stage of the suit, either on the application of any party or of its own motion and without waiting for the determination of any other question between the parties, make such order or give such judgment as it may think fit, having regard to such admission. Whenever a judgment is pronounced under sub-rule (1), a decree shall be drawn up in accordance with the judgment and the decree shall bear the date on which the judgment was pronounced.
20. The provisions of Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure clearly indicates the admission made by the defendants has to be without waiting for determination of any other questions between the parties.
22. Janardhan Jog vs. Srikrishna reported in ILR 1989 KAR 1895 an admission contemplated by Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has to be an absolute admission, capable of being worked out by itself. The other questions to be determined in the suit, on decree being made under Order XII Rule 6, should be such independent questions, reliefs granted on which should be capable of being granted without affecting the former decree (i.e, the one passed on the basis of admission). If the admitted fact cannot independently stand, and the ultimate relief or reliefs to be granted in the suit is interlinked with those facts, then, it will not be a proper exercise of the discretion, to make a decree under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal.
Daksha Legal 