Dismissed¶28

Kailash Chand Mehta Son of Shri Ramnarayan Ji Mehta v. Miss Pakhi Tyagi Daughter of Late Shri Ankush Tyagi

Rajasthan HC16 Mar 2026CW/1319/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan High Court Jaipur; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1319/2023; Kailash Chand Mehta v. Miss Pakhi Tyagi and Smt. Poorvi Manocha; Justice Bipin Gupta; decided 16/03/2026; Order XI Rules 12 and 14 read with Section 151 CPC; discovery of divorce decree; rejection affirmed; Article 227 of the Constitution of India; specific performance of agreement to sell; Ankush Tyagi; Civil Suit No. 40/2021; Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 6 Jaipur Metropolitan-II; writ petition dismissed; petitioner at liberty to raise objections in suit.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petitioner left at liberty to raise all objections available to him during the proceedings of the suit. ¶28

Kailash Chand Mehta Son of Shri Ramnarayan Ji… — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; petitioner left at liberty to raise all objections available to him during the proceedings of the suit.

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether discovery of the divorce decree was necessary to bring the true facts on record regarding whether respondent No. 2 had actually been divorced from Ankush Tyagi, such that the rejection of the application under Order XI Rules 12 and 14 read with Section 151 CPC was erroneous. +1 more

¶5

Court's answer

Since defendant-respondent No. 2 has clearly stated on oath that she has no defence in the present suit in her personal capacity, having already been divorced from late Ankush Tyagi, there is no necessity to direct discovery of the divorce decree under Order XI Rules 12 and 14 CPC, as the same is not required for proper adjudication of the suit property.

¶27

Ratio / Principle

No error has been committed by the learned trial court so as to warrant interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India; accordingly the writ petition is dismissed.

¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1319/2023, decided 16/03/2026, Justice Bipin Gupta) assailing the order dated 20.10.2022 of the Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 6, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, in Civil Suit No. 40/2021, rejecting the plaintiff-petitioner's application under Order XI Rules 12 and 14 read with Section 151 CPC for discovery of the divorce decree. The suit was for specific performance of an agreement to sell executed by Ankush Tyagi; after his death it proceeded against his legal successors, minor daughter Pakhi Tyagi and Smt. Poorvi/Purvi Manocha, who in her reply claimed she had already been divorced from the executant. The Court held that since respondent No. 2 had stated on oath that she had no personal defence in the suit, discovery of the divorce decree was not necessary for proper adjudication of the suit property; no error warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India had been committed; the writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to raise all objections during the suit. During hearing both parties agreed that respondent No. 1 (Pakhi Tyagi) had attained majority and could independently contest the suit.

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:11145]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1319/2023

¶4

Kailash Chand Mehta Son Of Shri Ramnarayan Ji Mehta, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of 94, Near Pnb College, Village Mukundpura, Tehsil And District Jaipur (Raj.)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Miss Pakhi Tyagi Daughter Of Late Shri Ankush Tyagi, Aged About 17 Years, Resident Of 129, Second Floor, Doctors Colony, D.c.m., Ajmer Road, Old Ward No. 14, Jaipur (Raj.) Through Her Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Poorvi Manocha Wife Of Late Shri Ankush Tyagi.

¶8

Smt. Poorvi Manocha Wife Of Late Shri Ankush Tyagi, Aged About 42 Years, Resident Of 129, Second Floor, Doctors Colony, D.c.m., Ajmer Road, Old Ward No. 14, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Lakhan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dharmedra Agarwal

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA Judgment / Order

¶12

16/03/2026

¶13

The present writ petition has been filed assailing the order dated 20.10.2022, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 6, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, in Civil Suit No. 40/2021, whereby the application filed by the plaintiff-petitioner under Order XI Rules 12 and 14 read with Section 151 of the CPC seeking discovery of the divorce decree has been rejected.

¶14

Learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner submits that the suit was filed by the plaintiff-petitioner for specific performance of an agreement to sell, which had been executed by Ankush Tyagi. After the death of Ankush Tyagi, the suit was instituted against his legal successors, namely Ms. Pakhi Tyagi, daughter of Ankush

[2026:RJ-JP:11145]

[CW-1319/2023]

(2 of 3)

Tyagi, along with Smt. Purvi Manocha, who is stated to be the wife of the deceased Ankush Tyagi.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the said suit, Purvi Manocha i.e. defendant-respondent No. 2 filed her reply contending that she had already been divorced from late Ankush Tyagi and, therefore, she has no concern with the present suit.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that she is the natural guardian of the minor daughter, Pakhi Tyagi, and therefore she is required to represent and defend the interests of the minor in the suit and she cannot deny her responsibility as the natural guardian.

¶21

He further contends that in order to bring the true facts on record regarding whether she had actually been divorced from Ankush Tyagi or not, it was necessary to call for the divorce decree. Therefore, the present writ petition may be allowed and order dated 20.10.2022 may be quashed and set aside.

¶22

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondent No. 2 is not denying her responsibility as the natural guardian of Pakhi Tyagi. She has merely stated in her reply that she has no personal defense in the suit as she had already been divorced from the original executant of the agreement to sell, namely Ankush Tyagi. He further submits that there was no necessity to call for the said document, as she has already stated on oath that she had obtained a divorce from Ankush Tyagi and that she is not claiming any right in respect of the property of Ankush Tyagi in the capacity of his wife in the present suit.

[2026:RJ-JP:11145]

[CW-1319/2023]

(3 of 3)

During the course of hearing, both parties are in agreement that Ms. Pakhi Tyagi (defendant-respondent No. 1) has now attained majority and, therefore, she has an independent right to contest the suit against the plaintiff.

¶27

This Court also finds that since defendant-repondent No. 2 has clearly stated on oath that she has no defence in the present suit in her personal capacity as she has already been divorced from late Ankush Tyagi, there is no necessity to direct discovery of the divorce decree under Order XI Rules 12 and 14 CPC, as the same is not required for proper adjudication of the suit property.

¶28

This Court finds that no error has been committed by the learned trial court so as to warrant interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the present writ petition is hereby dismissed.

¶29

Pending application, if any(s), stands disposed of.

¶30

However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all objections available to him during the proceedings of the suit.

¶31

(BIPIN GUPTA),J

¶32

JUBIN /52

Kailash Chand Mehta Son of Shri Ramnarayan Ji Mehta v. Miss Pakhi Tyagi Daughter of Late Shri Ankush Tyagi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kailash Chand Mehta Son of Shri Ramnarayan Ji Mehta v. Miss Pakhi Tyagi Daughter of Late Shri Ankush Tyagi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Devnani S/O Late Shri Madharam Devnani, Vs Smt. Lata Devnani Widow of Late Shri Bhagwandas Devnani

Mirza Abdul Kadir, Son of Late Shri Mirza Gani Beg Vs Kumari Abida, Daughter of Late Shri Mohammed Saddik

Smt. Premlata Goyal W/O Shri Late Murarilal Goyal Vs Shri Prabhudayal Saini S/O Shri Isarram Saini

Om Prakash Vs Lalit Kumar Son of Sharvan Kumar Agarwal (Babai Wale)

Sharwan Singh Rathore S/O Late Shri Jawahar Singh Rathore Vs Shankar Vaishnav S/O Shri Aturam Vaishnav

Phoolchand Sain Son of Late Shri Gyarsilal Sain Vs Alisher Son of Shri Deena