SANJIB BANERJEE, J.

The legal issue involved pertains to the proviso introduced in Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with effect from 2002.

2. A single bench of this court has put up the following question for a decision on reference:

“Whether, in view of Vidyabai vs. Padmalatha [(2009) 2 SCC 409], ‘commencement of trial’, as envisaged in the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, would mean the date of first hearing, that is the date of framing of issues, or the final hearing of the suit, examination of witnesses, filing of documents and addressing of arguments?”

3. Though the facts may not be completely relevant since it is only the legal question that has been referred to by the single bench that has to be answered, but it must be appreciated that no legal issue is decided in the abstract and the decision must always be pegged to a factual context. In this case the civil revision has arisen out of an order partly allowing an application to amend the plaint in an eviction suit. Issues have been framed in the suit. However, the evidence has not yet been received in the sense that no affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief has yet be