Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Krishna Kanta Das, S/o. Late Dehiram Das – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam, Represented By The Additional Chief Secretary To The Government Of Assam, Public Health Engineering Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Heard Ms. B. Chowdhury, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. I. Borthakur, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the PHE Department.
2. The Petitioner herein has sought for a direction from this Court thereby directing the Respondents to pay an amount of Rs.5,73,806/- on account of the same being due to the Petitioner for the works completed by the Petitioner.
3. It is relevant to take note of that the Petitioner herein claims the said amount on the basis of various work orders issued to the Petitioner on 05.01.2016, 20.01.2016 and 29.01.2016. It is stated that the works were duly completed by the Petitioner and in that regard have enclosed a Work Completion Certificate of one such work. However the said Completion Certificate is not dated.
4. The materials on record also do not show what steps were taken by the Petitioner for the purpose of realization of the said amount alleged to be due to the Petitioner. It was only in the year 2023 that too in the month of November, a joint representation was submitted by various contractors to the PHE Department including the Petitioner and as the Respondent Authorities have
The principle of delay and laches precludes a litigant from being entertained for judicial relief when there is excessive delay without adequate justification, impacting the rights of other parties.
The court will not entertain petitions filed after excessive delay, as it undermines the rights of other parties and contradicts the principles of equitable jurisdiction.
Excessive delay in approaching the court undermines writ jurisdiction, necessitating dismissal of claims lacking timely justification.
Inordinate delay in seeking relief can bar a petition under Article 226, emphasizing the principle of laches and the need for timely action by litigants.
Unexplained delay in seeking relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may lead to the dismissal of the petition.
The doctrine of delay and laches bars stale claims in writ petitions, emphasizing timely action for relief.
Point of Law : Limitation - Delay/Latches - Doctrine of laches in Courts of Equity cannot be said to be a technical doctrine and has to be examined on peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. D....
Inordinate delay in filing petitions without reasonable explanation can lead to dismissal, emphasizing the importance of promptness in asserting rights under Articles 32 and 226.
Approaching the court within a reasonable time is crucial, and delay and laches may lead to the dismissal of petitions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
