ORDER 1. By way of the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged the communication dated 11.10.2021 sent by Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mount Abu (hereinafter referred to as the 'Judicial Court') to learned Sub Divisional Officer, Mount Abu (hereinafter referred to as the 'Revenue Court') whereby the precept dated 13.09.2021 for summoning the original will dated 02.01.1982 has been turned down inter alia stating that the concerned Revenue Court has not cited any provision of law under which the original will can be sent to the Revenue Court. 2. Precisely stated, facts germane to the present writ petition are that one Narendra Singh Bhati had instituted a suit for declaration of his tenancy rights on the basis of a will, while impleading Fateh Singh father of the present petitioner No.1/1 as a respondent. 3. During the suit proceedings, one witness - Praveen Chand Shah appeared in the witness box and deposed that he will be in position to identify his signature as witness in case the original will dated 02.01.1982 executed by Smt. Alis Diana Wordsworth is placed before him. 4. Hence, the present petitioners (defendants) moved an application under Order XIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure and prayed that the original will, which is lying in the Judicial Court in relation to Criminal Case No.1331/2013 be summoned. 5. Pursuant to petitioner's application, the Revenue Court sent a precept dated 13.09.2021 and requested the Judicial Court to send the original will for the purpose of examination/cross-examination in the case pending before it. 6. The Judicial Court vide its communication dated 11.10.2021 refused to send the original will, inter alia observing that there is no statutory provision for sending the original will to Revenue Court. It was also observed that the parties can obtain a certified copy of the will and may do the needful, while observing that certified copy is admissible in evidence. 7. Mr. B. S. Sandhu, learned counsel for the petitioner challenging the above referred communication dated 11.10.2021 argued that the Sub Divisional Officer, Mount Abu (Revenue Court) is also a Court within the meaning of Section 5 (35) of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1955') and further submitted that in terms of Section 208 of the Act of 1955 all the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure are applicable to such Courts. He clarified that Order XIII Rule 10 of the CPC has not been placed under the exceptions carved out in Section 208 and thus, the provisions of Order XIII Rule 10 of the Code are equally applicable to Revenue Court and thus, the Revenue Court can exercise all the powers which are vested in Civil Courts/Judicial Courts, including the power to summon relevant documents from another Court. 8. Mr. Benilwal, learned Additional Advocate General though could not dispute the aforesaid position of facts and law, however, submitted that the petitioner can obtain a certified copy of the will from the concerned Court and produce the same before the Revenue Court for the purpose of completion of evidence. 9. Heard. 10. Upon perusal of the cross-examination of Mr. Praveen Chandra Shah (aged 83 years), this Court finds that said witness, in no ambiguous terms, had expressed that he would be able to identify his signature only when original will is placed before him. 11. Indisputably, a certified copy of the will was already there before the said witness when he testified on 13.09.2021 and yet showed his inability to identify his own signature and requested the original will. 12. Hence, this Court is of the view that the original will is necessary for the purpose of completion of evidence of said witness - Praveen Chandra Shah. 13. Adverting to the fact as to whether the Revenue Court can exercise power under Order XIII Rule 10 of CPC, this Court is of the view that the Revenue Court is also a Court within the meaning of Section 5 (35) of the Act of 1955 and thus, it can pass appropriate order summoning a document while exercising powers of Order XIII Rule 10 of the Code from all Courts, including a Judicial Court. 14. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned communication dated 11.10.2021 (Annex.7) is, hereby, quashed. 15. The learned Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mount Abu, is hereby directed to send the original will in sealed envelope to the concerned Sub Divisional Officer, Mount Abu on the next date of hearing, which is reported to be 28.02.2022 or any other date, which the Revenue Court fixes. 16. 15. The learned Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mount Abu, is hereby directed to send the original will in sealed envelope to the concerned Sub Divisional Officer, Mount Abu on the next date of hearing, which is reported to be 28.02.2022 or any other date, which the Revenue Court fixes. 16. The will in original shall be produced for completion of the evidence of said Praveen Chandra Shah and after his evidence is over, the same shall be returned/sent to the Judicial Court. 17. The writ petition is allowed, as indicated above. 18. Stay application too stands disposed of accordingly.