Find a Lawyer

ALTAF HUSSAIN BOKHARI versus SIDDIQUE AHMAD CHAUDHRY

The defendant's property has the right to support the property of the defendant inspected by the court for dismissal of the suit and test hearing, R18 suit of the witnesses of Civil Procedure Code Order XVIII, who, while building something illegal and The illegal demolition wall collapsed, causing great damage to the plaintiff's house and suing the plaintiff for damages and presenting two expert witnesses who jointly inspected the two properties for inspection. On request, the civil judge inspected and registered it. During the inspection note and the damages payable to the plaintiff, the testimony of the two expert witnesses was carefully ignored and instead the matter was decided by a civil judge based on a visual inspection of the plaintiff's property. It was observed that there were only a few minor cracks that could be removed. By making the necessary repairs, the cost involved was far more inaccurate and self-contradictory than the claim of the trial court's plaintiff's view on the matter involved, which is the purpose of inspection under O XVIII, R 18, CPC. Could not be proved, it was only to assist the court in understanding and appreciating the dispute. Evidence on the record, but there was neither alternative evidence of the examination made by the court nor could it rule out the evidence on record. The court was required to decide the matter on the basis of evidence and not the examination conducted by the judge. Unless otherwise available. Specific agreement by the parties is bound to be a decision made by the judge on a personal inspection even though the examiner must be reassigned at the time of inspection. property advocate from Talhur lawyer