Report No. 77
Arguments, Judgment and Decree
The next step after the completion of evidence relates to arguments in the case. The desirable practice for this purpose is to hear arguments immediately after the conclusion of the evidence. As it is, we find that in most of the courts there is time lag, sometimes considerable, between the conclusion of the evidence and the addressing of arguments in the case. From a practical point of view, the above practice now adopted not only causes inconvenience; it also results in duplication of labour.
If evidence is recorded at a stretch-as is normally contemplated by the Code of Civil Procedure-and the arguments are heard soon after the close of evidence, everything would be fresh in the minds of the counsel for the parties as well as the presiding officer of the court. This would facilitate the task of the Court in appreciating the contentions advanced and appraising the evidence adduced at the trial.
On the contrary; if arguments are heard after a great length of time, that whole thing would have to be reread by the counsel for the parties and lengthy passages from the evidence would have to be read by them for the benefit of the presiding officer with a view to acquaint him with the things brought out in the deposition of the witnesses. The general experience is that arguments advanced soon after the close of evidence take much less time compared with Arguments which are advanced after a long interval of time.