Delhi High Court on Amendment of Written Statement: Lack of Diligence Bars Relief.

Headnote:

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court’s order rejecting a defendant’s plea to amend her written statement, holding that the request was barred under the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC. The Court found that the petitioner failed to show due diligence in raising the new plea before the commencement of trial, particularly since she had sufficient time after her husband’s release from jail to verify relevant facts.

Background:

• The petitioner, Farhana Sami, sought amendment of her written statement in a civil suit filed by Dynamik Developers Pvt. Ltd..

• She claimed ignorance of certain payment details at the time of filing her original statement because her husband, who handled the transactions, was in jail.

• After her husband’s release, she claimed to have learned that the entire suit amount had already been paid and sought to amend her defence accordingly.

• The trial court dismissed her application, citing the bar under the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC, as the trial had already commenced.

Court’s Observations:

• The Court reiterated that amendment after commencement of trial can only be permitted if the applicant demonstrates that despite due diligence, the matter could not have been raised earlier.

• The petitioner failed to show that her husband’s imprisonment prevented her from knowing the facts, and she did not plead or prove that he was in jail at the time of filing the written statement.

• Even assuming lack of initial knowledge, the Court noted that her husband was released on 05.10.2024, and trial began on 29.03.2025, yet she took no steps during that period to amend her pleadings.

• The Court concluded that there was “complete lack of diligence” and upheld the trial court’s order refusing the amendment.

Legal Provisions Discussed:

• Order VI Rule 17, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Amendment of pleadings; bar after commencement of trial unless due diligence is shown.

Summary:

The Delhi High Court dismissed a plea to amend a written statement after trial commencement, holding that ignorance of facts due to a spouse’s imprisonment is no excuse when due diligence was not exercised within the available time.

Citation: 2025:DHC:112945

Case: Farhana Sami v. Dynamik Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Coram: Justice Girish Kathpalia

Date of Decision: 6 November 2025

Case No.: CM(M) 2105/2025 & CM APPL. 68903/2025