delay defeats equities
This maxim (also vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt) means that a person who delays unreasonably in seeking relief, so that the other side has changed position or evidence has been lost, may be refused relief even if the claim is otherwise just. Delay of this kind is called laches.
Where a statute of limitation applies, the period fixed by the Limitation Act, 1963 governs and courts do not refuse relief merely for delay within it. Laches matters most for discretionary remedies: writs under Article 226, specific performance and injunctions. The Supreme Court has refused writ relief to petitioners who approached the court years later without explanation.
Example
The writ petition challenging the 2009 seniority list was dismissed in 2024 on the principle that delay defeats equities.
In Indian law
- Limitation Act, 1963
See also
Read more in the study notes
- Judicial control: public and private law remedies, writ procedure and ouster clauses (Administrative Law)
- Res judicata and bar to further suit (sections 11 and 12) (Civil Procedure Code and Limitation Act)
- Writ petitions under Articles 32 and 226 (Drafting, Pleading and Conveyance)
- Temporal dimensions of rights and legal relations (Legal Concepts)