IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDIUCATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. ORDER 8.12.2008. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10589/2008 Ram Sahay & Anr. Vs. Sheopari Devi & Ors. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Shri Vimal Kumar Jain, for the petitioner. Shri Rajeev Bandhu, for the respondent. Heard learned counsel for the parties. At the time of admission of the writ petition on 24.09.2008, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned trial court had permitted the plaintiff to tender in evidence the document filed during the recording of the statement of the plaintiff without there being any formal application to that effect. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the plaintiff-non petitioner has only submitted the copies of the revenue records which are certified copies of public documents as mentioned in the “Fard Dastavej” which have been filed as Annexures-2 and 3, therefore, the defendant- petitioner cannot be said to be prejudiced for non-filing of the formal application. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, when admittedly all the documents which were being tendered in evidence vide Annexures-2 and 3 are said to be public documents coming from proper custody, are the certified true copies, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. However, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, liberty is granted to the defendant-petitioner that in case the petitioner wants to file or produce any document in rebuttal, the learned trial court shall permit the petitioner to tender the same in evidence. Subject to the above, this writ petition is disposed of. The application No.39922 submitted by the respondents for vacation of ex-parte order is also disposed of. (DALIP SINGH),J. Ramchandrkhatri,PS