1 wp9380.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 9380 of 2010 Satellite Developers Pvt. Ltd. ... Petitioner v/s. Rajendra Dwarkadas Hingwala & ors. ... Respondents Mr. Nitin Thakkar a/w. Mr. Kapil Moge a/w. Mr. Yogendra Kanchan i/b. Mr. Vijay Dhingreja for the petitioner. Mr. B.G. Vaidya i/b. S.P. Kamat for respondent no.8. CORAM:- B.R. GAVAI, J DATED :- MARCH 29, 2011. P.C. Admittedly, the affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief is filed on 6th November, 2009. Admittedly, the Chamber Summons for amendment is filed on 3rd December, 2009. From the perusal of the averments which are sought to be brought on record by way of amendment it can clearly be seen that had the petitioner exercised due diligence, the said matter could have been brought on record prior to commencement of trial. The perusal 2 wp9380.10.sxw of the averments would further reveal that none of the averments pertains to any subsequent event which has taken place after the commencement of the trial. 2. The Apex Court in the case of Vidyabai v/s. Padmalatha & anr. reported in 2009 (4) Mh. L.J. has clearly held that, by way of an amendment the matter is sought to be placed on record, which with exercise of due diligence could have been brought on record prior to commencement of trial, such an amendment cannot be allowed and has further held that it goes to the very jurisdiction of the learned trial Court to entertain such an application. 3. Though the Chamber Summons is not rejected on the said ground, since as per the Judgment of the Apex Court even entertaining of such an application raises the question of jurisdiction, I find that no case is made out for interference. Rejected. (B.R. GAVAI, J)