ORDER : This revision has been filed by the defendants against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Manipur, in favour of plaintiff respondent in S.C.C. Case No. of 1963 of that Court. 2. The material facts in brief are that L. Boramani Singh brought a suit against N. Ibobi Singh and his son N. Iboyaima Singh for recovery of Rs. 450/-. The suit was heard by the Judge, Small Cause Court, Manipur who decreed it. The defendants have come up on revision to this Court. 3. On going through the record I find that there is the plaint, the pleas and the judgment. There is no abstract of the evidence of the witnesses heard by the Court. Under S. 17, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, the procedure prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure, is to be followed in a Court of Small Causes. Order 18 R. 13, C.P.C., prescribes that in case in which appeal is net allowed it shall not be necessary to take down the evidence of the witnesses in writing at length; but the Judge as his examination of each witness proceeds shall make a memorandum of the substance of what he deposes and such memorandum shall be written and signed by the Judge and shall form part of the record. 4. In my opinion it is not enough that the Judge should refer to the evidence in his judgment. It is mandatory that he should make a separate memorandum of the. evidence given by each witness and shall sign it. In this case, the trial Judge has net complied with the requirements of O. 18, R. 13, C.P.C., read with S. 17, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. 5. I, therefore, accept the petition, set aside the decree of the trial Judge and remand the case to him with the direction that ha should proceed according to law. Costs to follow the event. Petition allowed; Case Remanded.