RATAN SHARMA Vs. AMBESEDAR DRYCLEANERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both the revisions, question of admissibility of photostat copy of a rent note is involved, as such both are being decided by a common order.

(2.) Revision No. 235 of 1992 arises from the order dated 16-11-1991 passed by the Additional Civil Judge No. 5 Jaipur City in Civil Suit No. 16/85 whereby application of the petitioner filed under Section 65 of the Evidence Act for permission to lead in evidence the photostat copy of rent note, was rejected.

(3.) Revision No. 866 of 1993 arises from the order dated 24-7-1993 of the Additional Civil Judge No. 6 Jaipur City, in Civil Suit No. 57 of 1988 whereby the application for leading in evidence the photostat copy of the rent note under Section 65 of the Evidence Act, was dismissed.