Delhi High Court on Amendment of Written Statement: Lack of Due Diligence Bars Relief under Order VI Rule 17 CPC

Headnote:

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging the trial court’s refusal to allow amendment of a written statement, holding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate due diligence as required under the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC. The Court observed that even after her husband’s release from jail, the petitioner made no attempt to amend her pleadings before trial commenced, reflecting a clear lack of diligence.

Background:

• The petitioner/defendant sought amendment of her written statement, claiming that as a homemaker dependent on her husband—who was in jail at the time of filing—she was unaware of the full facts, including prior payments made to the respondent/plaintiff.

• She argued that only after her husband’s release did she come to know that the entire suit amount had already been paid, necessitating amendment of the written statement.

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

Court’s Observations:

• The Court reiterated that under the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC, amendments cannot be allowed after commencement of trial unless the applicant shows that despite due diligence, the matter could not have been raised earlier.

• The petitioner failed to plead or produce any evidence that her husband was in jail when the written statement was filed.

• Even assuming lack of knowledge during his incarceration, the petitioner offered no explanation for not seeking amendment between her husband’s release on 05.10.2024 and commencement of trial on 29.03.2025.

• The Court held that this period of inaction clearly indicated lack of due diligence.

Legal Provisions Discussed:

• Order VI Rule 17, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Amendment of pleadings and limitation after commencement of trial.

Outcome

The Court upheld the trial court’s order and dismissed the petition along with the accompanying application.

Citation: 2025:DHC:— (Exact citation awaited)

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