ASHOK KUMAR Vs. KANHAIYA LAL GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent, matter is finally heard.

(2.) The petitioner has prayed for review of the order dated 7.5.2013 in WP No.683/2010. Shri R.K.Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner advanced singular contention. He submits that the document sought to be produced as secondary evidence was a certified will issued by the Notary in the year 1975. By taking this Court to certain provisions of the Notary Act, 1952, it is contended that the Notary is authorised to issue such certificate and, therefore, the review petitioner's case is covered under section 63 (3) of the Evidence Act. He submits that this Court has erred in rejecting the contention. Prayer is opposed by Shri Sanjay Sharma. He submits that the prayer of the petitioner is beyond the scope of review jurisdiction of this Court. No other point is pressed by learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The order of this Court shows that the similar contention was advanced by the other side, which is considered in the order dated 7.5.2013. Section 63(3) of the Evidence Act provides that secondary evidence means and includes copy made from or compared with the original. The contention of the petitioner was rejected by assigning following reasons : -