Withdrawal of admissions in pleadings requires bona fides and no unfair prejudice; amendment to delete expiry admission rejected.

Admissions in pleadings may be withdrawn or explained through amendment where the request is bona fide and advances substantive justice, but the amendment must not cause unfair prejudice to the other side. Here, the petitioner sought to delete an admitted statement that the agreement had expired, despite having knowledge of the contractual dates when the statement was made. The attempted deletion was viewed as an effort to avoid an adverse position after the respondents had altered their stance in reliance on the earlier admission. The proposed amendment was therefore treated as prejudicial and lacking bona fides, and the application was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner should be permitted to amend the petition to delete an admitted statement concerning the expiry of the agreement.

Analysis: An admission in pleadings may, in principle, be withdrawn or explained, and amendment jurisdiction is generally exercised to advance substantive justice. The request, however, must be bona fide and should not unfairly prejudice the opposite party. On the facts, the earlier assertion about the expiry of the agreements was made with knowledge of the contractual dates, and the subsequent attempt to delete it was viewed as an to escape an adverse position. The respondents had also altered their position on the basis of the earlier statement, making the proposed change unfairly prejudicial.

Conclusion: The amendment was not allowed and the application was rejected.

---