Order This Revision Petition has been preferred against the Order of the Judge of the Court of Small Causes dismissing the application filed by the plaintiff for the grant of certified copies of the notes of evidence recorded in the suit, for his use and reference in the Revision Petition preferred to the High Court against the Order of the New Trial Bench in N.T.A. No. 420 of 1961 from the Judgment in Suit No. 1671 of 1961. The order of the learned Judge shows that his attention was pointedly drawn to a Full Bench Judgment of this Court in State of Madras v. Krishnan1. But yet curiously enough the learned Judge has rejected the application for the grant of certified copies of the notes of evidence. It is obvious that the learned Judge has made a short work of the matter and had not perused with any care the Judgment of the Full Bench which directly dealt with the point. The brief reasons contained in the Order of the learned Judge run counter to the reasonings contained in the Full Bench Judgment. When the defeated plaintiff in the suit applies for copies of notes of evidence it is very extraordinary for the learned Judge to hold that the party has not made out that he is interested in the copy asked for. In support of the application an affidavit of the Clerk of the concerned Advocate has been filed and in the petition the purpose for which the certified copy was required is specially mentioned. It is sheer technicality with vengeance to reject the application on the ground that the application should have been supported by the affidavit of the party himself. The view of the learned Judge is perverse in the extreme. Section 76 of the Evidence Act provides that every public officer having the custody of a public document which any person has a right to inspect shall give that person on demand a copy of it, on payment of the legal fees there for together with the certificate written at the foot of such a copy that it is a true copy of such a document. Section 74 of the Evidence Act defines what are known as public documents. Section 74 of the Evidence Act defines what are known as public documents. In State of Madras v. Krishnan1 the question arose whether the statements recorded under section 164, Criminal Procedure Code would be public documents falling under section 74 of the Evidence Act and whether the accused will be entitled to copies of the same as a person interested, before the filing of the charge-sheet. In considering the relative scope of section 74 and 76 it was held that under section 76, the interest of the person applying for a certified copy should be a direct and a tangible one, and that if a person has made out sufficient interest shoving that such inspection is reasonable and necessary for the protection of his interests he would be entitled to obtain a certified copy. I have no hesitation in holding that a defeated litigant who has initiated a proceeding in the superior Court has an undoubted tangible real interest to inspect the records of the proceedings of the lower Court within the meaning of section 76 of the Evidence Act. Notes of evidence recorded by the Court of Small Causes will undoubtedly be a public document within the meaning of section 74 (1) (iii). It is sufficient to refer to the following statement of the law in the Full Bench decision at page 73: “It is now well accepted that the recording of a deposition by a Judicial Officer is a public act, and that the depositions of witnesses taken by the Officer of the Court are public documents; Vide Hara Nund v. Ram Gopal1, Chandreshwar Prasad Narain Singh2 In view of this clear pronouncement, the matter does not require any further elaboration. So long as no rules have been framed prescribing the procedure to be followed for the application for the grant of the certified copy, it is sufficient if the party or his Advocate files a petition stating the reason why the copy is required. I see no distinction between notes of evidence and the full deposition of the witnesses as recorded by the Judges. For all these reasons the Order of the learned Judge is set aside and he is directed to furnish the party the certified copy asked for. There shall be no order as to costs. V.K.-----Order accordingly.