As per case facts, the appellant, Dr. Karan Singh, filed a writ petition in the High Court claiming ownership and title to six boxes of jewellery and valuable articles held ... in Srinagar Toshakhana. These items were secured under lock and seal. The petition arose from pending matters with the Government of India concerning whether the appellant owned the items as heirlooms and if they qualified for exemption under Section 5(1)(xiv) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. Following a suggestion from the Central Board of Direct Taxes for a physical inspection by experts to determine if the properties were heirlooms, the appellant applied to the High Court for this inspection. The High Court, however, dismissed the application, stating no useful purpose would be served. The appellant appealed this decision to the Supreme Court. The question arose whether denying the physical inspection of the jewellery and other valuable articles by experts was valid, especially given its relevance to determining ownership, heirloom status, and the applicability of Wealth Tax exemption. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that the High Court's refusal to grant inspection was erroneous. It directed that the six boxes be opened for inspection by a panel including the Member, Central Board of Direct Taxes, and other experts like Director General of Archaeological Survey, Director Antiques, and approved valuers. This inspection was deemed crucial for determining the true nature of the articles, whether they constitute heirlooms or personal use items of the appellant's family, and thereby facilitating the resolution of the ownership and exemption claims. The Court emphasized that such expert inspection would unquestionably aid in the determination, regardless of the preliminary objections regarding the maintainability of the writ petition or the appellant's prima facie title.