MANISH SHARMA, SON OF SHRI VEDVRATT SHARMA v. SMT MAYA DEVI, WIFE OF SHRI PRABHU DAYAL SAINI
CW/17754/2025 · 2025-11-28
Bipin Gupta
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 43861 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 43861 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:48384] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17754/2025 Manish Sharma, Son Of Shri Vedvratt Sharma, Aged About 54 Years, Resident Of Plot No D-152A, Durga Marg, Banipark, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus
1. Smt Maya Devi, Wife Of Shri Prabhu Dayal Saini, Resident Of Ward No 10, Near Ramdev Ji Mandir, Jeenagar Mohalla, Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu.
2. Basant Kumar, Son Of Shri Madan Lal Balodiya, Resident Of Plot No 236, Bhindo Ka Rasta, Chokadi Topkhana Desh, Jaipur At Present Resident Of F-55, Mahesh Marg, C- Scheme, Jaipur
3. Pramod Kumar Sharma, Son Of Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, Resident Of Plot No F-25, Jamna Lal Bajaj Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chobisa For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA
Order 28/11/2025 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-plaintiff, assailing the order dated 04.11.2025, whereby the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after getting certain documents under Right to Information Act, he submitted an application under Order 7 Rule 14(3) CPC. The documents were taken on record by the trial Court. Subsequently, he filed an application for amendment of his pleadings to incorporate the
[2025:RJ-JP:48384] (2 of 2) [CW-17754/2025] pleadings in respect of those documents. The said application has wrongly been rejected by the trial Court and therefore, he prayed that the writ petition may be allowed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The suit is simpliciter for specific performance and as a consequential relief of declaration that the subsequent sale deed is null and void. The suit has been pending since 2007. The Learned trial Court has recorded the reason that pleadings in respect of the documents are not necessary for disposal of the present suit and therefore, found that at such belated stage, the amendment cannot be permitted, merely on account of the discovery of the documents by the plaintiff. This Court finds no error in the order of the trial Court so as to call for any interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No
order as to cost. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(BIPIN GUPTA),J PARSHANT /11