Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O. XVIII, r. 18, O. XLI, r. 27

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) O. XVIII, r. 18-Power of Court to inspect any property or thing- Purpose and scope of-Inspection note, not a substitute for evidence- Judgment based on such note (unless parties agree) not binding----Mere signing of the note by counsel of parties or axing of thumb impressions of parties would not add to its evidentiary value. The purpose of Order XVIII, rule 13, C. P. C. is to enable the tribunal to understand the questions that are being raised, to follow the evidence, and to apply the evidence. Inspections by Courts are intended to test the accuracy of evidence let in. Where no evidence has been recorded and the Court appears to be influenced merely by its own inspection note, the Court in effect becomes a kind of witness in the case and the judgment is not proper. It is clear that inspection is not a substitute for evidence and a judgment based merely upon inspection is not binding unless the parties agree. But where the parties had agreed to accept the opinion of the Judge on certain point requiring spot inspection sad for that reason led no evidence, in such special circumstances, the opinion of the Judge can be accepted in place of evidence. In most cases it would be desirable for the Judge to confine his notes to the facts which he observed without recording his impressions or opinions. He is entitled to form his impressions, but if he records them in the notice, the parties should have the opportunity to meet them in their arguments and he should not decide the case merely from his impressions without giving due weight to the evidence. Now, the opinions and impressions recorded by the trial Judge in the instant case cannot be in any manner held to be overriding the evidence on the record or to supply the missing links in the evidence of either of the parties. The argument that the signa tures under the endorsement 'who accept it as correct' give rise to an inference that the respondent expressly or at least impliedly accepted the truth of tile contents of the note is not inspiring, because the act of subscribing signatures or thumb-impressions to the inspection note does not turn it into any admissions or…