IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9252 of 2011 NIRMAL KUMAR Versus DHARAM PAL ----------- 05. 23.06.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party. This writ application has been filed against the order dated 29.02.2009 passed by Sub Judge II, Danapur in Title Suit No.29 of 2000 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for taking into evidence a photo copy of typed copy of the so called Judgment passed by the lower Court has been rejected. The learned counsel, Mr. R.K.P. Singh appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that in view of the Judgment reported in 2002 (2) P.L.J.R. 772 and 1997 Rajasthan 75, the learned Court below should have admitted the typed copy of the said document in evidence. From perusal of both the said decisions of this Court as well as the Rajasthan High Court, it appears that in those cases, photocopy pf the original was filed. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that in fact, photocopy of the 2 typed copy has been filed in the case, therefore, the document is neither a public document nor the private document. As such the learned Court below has rightly rejected the application. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that earlier same prayer was made by the petitioner and by terms of order dated 05.04.2004, the prayer was rejected. It further appears that the document sought to be produced as Ext. is a photocopy of typed copy. It is neither a public document nor any photocopy of the original or of certified copy. The learned Court below has given good reason and, therefore, in exercise of power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)