VIDYABAI & Ors. v. PADMALATHA & Anr.

1.2. The proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC is couched in a mandatory form. The court's jurisdiction to allow such an application is taken aY(ay unless the conditions precedent are satisfied, viz., it must come fo a conclusion that inspite of due diligence, the parties could not raise the matter before the commencement of the trial. From the order passed by the trial court, it is evident that the respondents had not been able to fulfill the said pre condition. The trial had commenced. The date on which the issues were framed is the date of first hearing. F Provisions of the CPC envisage taking of various steps at different stages of the proceeding. Filing of an affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief of the witness would amount to 'commencement ofr proceeding'. [Paras 7 and · 8) [510-E-~-H; 511-A-B] , Pradeep Singhvi and Another v. Heero Dhankani and I I I - I G Others (2004) 13 SCC 432, distinguished. I