Read Time: 06 minutes

The Single Judge Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot of Allahabad High Court while dismissing the petition has observed delay and laches on part of the litigant will disentitle him to any relief.

“Law has long set its face against delay in approaching the court. The courts have consistently declined to condone the delay and denied relief to litigants who are guilty of laches. Litigants who are in long slumber and not vigilant about their rights are discouraged by the courts. Belated claims are rejected at the threshold. All this is done on the foot of the rule of delay and laches. Statutes of limitation are ordained by the legislature, rule of laches was evolved by the courts. Sources of the law differ but the purpose is congruent. Statutes of limitation and the law of delay and laches are rules of repose.”, the Bench noted. 

In the present matter, the petitioners while assailing the order dated 09.09.2016 in which they were not a party claimed inheritance from the deceased (Ram Avtar) who executed the will deed in petitioner’s favour. 

“The authenticity of the Will deed and rights of petitioners as successors have first to be approved by the competent court before the petitioners can maintain any petition on behalf of the deceased Ram Avtar. It could not be pointed out what heritable rights of the petitioners devolving from Ram Avtar (since deceased) are being canvassed before this Court.”, the Court observed. 

Reliance was placed on the Apex Court judgement in S.S. Rathore Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (1989 (4) SCC 582.C.), Jacob Vs. Director of Geology & Min. Indus. Est. and another (2008 (10) SCC 115), Shankara Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. Vs. M. Prabhakar and ors. (2011 (5) SCC 607), Shiv Dass Vs. Union of India (2007 (9) SCC 274) Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Balwant Regular Motor Service AIR 1969 SC 329 & R & M Trust Vs. Koramangala Residents Vigilance Group and others 2005 (3) SCC 91 to observe that delay and laches on part of the litigant will disentitle him to any relief.

“The rule of laches and delay is founded on sound policy and is supported by good authority. The rule of laches and delay is employed by the courts as a tool for efficient administration of justice and a bulwark against abuse of the process of courts.”, the Court said. 

The Court said that the petitioner did not give any satisfactory explanation of the delay & that the explanation of laches was self serving & lacked credibility. Thus, the Bench took note of the fact that the writ was barred by delay & laches & was not liable to be entertained. 

Case Title: Ganga Sahay & 2 others v. Deputy Director of Consolidation & 14 others|WRIT - B No. - 302 of 2021