IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.696 of 2009 KEDARNATH MAHASETH @ SANTOSH MAHASETH Versus SMT. JANAKLALI DEVI ----------- 2. 18.5.2009 Heard. After having heard both the sides and perusing the order impugned herein, I do not find any material irregularity or wrong application of jurisdiction by the court below in passing the impugned order because most of the documents which were filed on 24.2.2009 appeared to be copies of certain petitions for the proof of such one shall have to take recourse to the procedure laid down by the Indian Evidence Act. It was contended that those documents were meant to prove the statement of a witness in the light of the provisions of Sections 145 and 147 of the Evidence Act. The parties shall be free to make submissions on that aspect of the matter as indicated herein and the court believes that the court below would not be strained by the present order in not looking to that particular part of this documents so as to reading them for the purposes as indicated under those provisions of the Indian Evidence Act. The above may happen during - 2 - the course of argument of the parties. The revision petition is dismissed with the above directions. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )