ORDER 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner-defenant No.1 assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 23.10.2021 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Jhunjhunu in Civil Suit No.56/2018 whereby, allowing the application filed by the respondent No.1-plaintiff under Sections 65 & 66 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (for brevity, 'the Act of 1872'), a photocopy of the registered patta has been permitted as secondary evidence. 2. The facts in brief are that the respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for eviction, possession and permanent injunction on the strength of a patta dated 10.11.1986 issued by the Gram Panchayat Kolinda in his favour. During the course of trial, he moved an application under Sections 65 & 66 of the Act of 1872 seeking permission of the Court to exhibit a photocopy of the patta by way of secondary evidence. The application has been allowed by the learned trial Court vide its order dated 23.10.2021, which is subject matter of challenge. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, drawing attention of this Court towards the provisions of Section 65 of the Act of 1872, canvasses that when the original is a public document within the meaning of Section 74, its certified copy only is admissible as secondary evidence and no other kind. He submits that since, the patta in question is a public document having been issued by the Gram Panchayat Kolinda, its photocopy was not admissible as secondary evidence. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed and the order dated 23.10.2021 be quashed and set aside. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff submitted that vide order dated 23.10.2021, the document has been permitted to be exhibited only with specific observation that its validity is still to be established by him and hence, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 5. Heard. Considered. Section 65 (e) & (f) provides as under: '(e) when the original is a public document within the meaning of Section 74; (f) when the original is a document of which a certified copy is permitted by this Act, or by any other law in force in India to be given in evidence.' 6. It is further provided therein that in case (e) (f), a certified copy of the document, but no other kind of secondary evidence, is admissible. 7. It is further provided therein that in case (e) (f), a certified copy of the document, but no other kind of secondary evidence, is admissible. 7. Indisputably, the document in question, the patta, is a public document and hence, its photocopy is not admissible as secondary evidence. 8. In view thereof, the order passed by the learned trial Court permitting photocopy of the public document to be taken on record as secondary evidence cannot be sustained in the eye of law. 9. Resultantly, this writ petition is allowed. The order dated 23.10.2021 is quashed and set aside. The application filed by the respondent-plaintiff under Section 65 & 66 of the Act of 1872 stands dismissed.