Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Maxims of Law - The principle lex non cogit ad impossibillia states that the law does not compel a person to perform an impossible act. This maxim is frequently invoked to justify non-performance due to circumstances beyond control, emphasizing that no obligation exists where performance is impossible ["M. P. Wakf. Board VS State of M. P. - Madhya Pradesh"] ["Rajkumarsingh s/o Dr. K. B. Singh VS Amravati University, through its Registrar, Amravati and another - Bombay"] ["Mukati Transformers Ltd. VS Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. - Rajasthan"] ["Ram Sewak Madan Mohan VS Commissioner, Commercial Taxes - Allahabad"].
Judicial Application - Courts have applied this maxim to various cases, including transfer of cases, tax disputes, contractual obligations, and procedural compliances. For instance, courts have refused to transfer cases where such transfer would amount to legislation or would violate legislative provisions, citing impossibility ["M. P. Wakf. Board VS State of M. P. - Madhya Pradesh"]. Similarly, in tax and contractual contexts, courts have upheld decisions based on the impossibility of fulfilling certain requirements, reinforcing that the law excuses performance under such circumstances ["Ram Sewak Madan Mohan VS Commissioner, Commercial Taxes - Allahabad"] ["Hico Enterprises VS Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai - Custom Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal"].
Doctrine of Impossibility - The maxim is closely linked with related maxims like impotentia excusat legem (inability excuses the law) and impossibillium nulla obligatio est (nothing is obligatory if impossible). Courts have consistently held that when circumstances make performance impossible—such as legal formalities or statutory obligations—the law relieves parties from liability or obligation ["Ram Sewak Madan Mohan VS Commissioner, Commercial Taxes - Allahabad"] ["Heera Mani VS State of H. P. - Himachal Pradesh"] ["Kiran Devi VS Central Coal Field Ltd. - Jharkhand"].
Legal and Constitutional Context - The maxim underscores that legislative or judicial actions cannot compel impossible acts, and courts are bound to interpret laws within the limits of possibility. Courts have emphasized that they cannot create new tribunals or override legislative mandates, especially when such actions would be impossible or unconstitutional ["M. P. Wakf. Board VS State of M. P. - Madhya Pradesh"].
Conclusion - The judgment across various cases confirms that lex non cogit ad impossibillia is a fundamental legal principle, serving as a justification for non-performance when circumstances render compliance impossible. Courts rely on this maxim to prevent unjust obligations and to ensure that legal duties are not enforced where performance is objectively impossible ["M. P. Wakf. Board VS State of M. P. - Madhya Pradesh"] ["Ram Sewak Madan Mohan VS Commissioner, Commercial Taxes - Allahabad"] ["Hico Enterprises VS Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai - Custom Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal"].
Imagine a natural disaster strikes, making it physically impossible to fulfill a legal obligation like filing a report or delivering goods. Does the law still hold you accountable? This is where the ancient legal maxim Lex non cogit ad impossibilia—Latin for the law does not compel a person to do what is impossible—comes into play. In a recent criminal court judgment, this principle was invoked to excuse non-compliance due to unavoidable circumstances. But what exactly did the court decide? This post breaks down the judgment, key precedents, and practical insights, drawing from established Indian jurisprudence.
Note: This article provides general information on legal principles and is not a substitute for professional legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your specific situation.
The question at the heart of the criminal court judgment is: Judgement of the criminal court on the maxim Lex Non Cogit ad Impossibilia. The court's ruling aligns with longstanding principles that impossibility—caused by supervening events beyond a party's control, such as acts of God or natural calamities—excuses non-performance of legal duties. Courts typically recognize this as a valid defense, invoking the maxim to prevent injustice. ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR VS KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL - 2020 4 Supreme 405
This maxim signifies that law does not compel impossible acts. ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR VS KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL - 2020 4 Supreme 405 It is closely linked to another principle, impotentia excusat legem, meaning invincible disability excuses compliance with the law. Jharkhand Quraish Panchayat and Shopkeeper Welfare Society VS State of Jharkhand - 2023 0 Supreme(Jhk) 658 Together, they emphasize that the law is reasonable and does not demand the impossible.
The criminal court's judgment reinforces that when performance becomes impossible due to circumstances over which the party has no control, non-compliance is excused. This includes supervening events like natural disasters. The court held that such impossibility justifies exemption from legal obligations, preventing penalties for what cannot be achieved. UFLEX LIMITED VS STATE OF U. P. - 2016 0 Supreme(All) 1078
Key points from the ruling include:- Core Principle: Law does not require impossible performance. ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR VS KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL - 2020 4 Supreme 405- Valid Excuses: Acts of God or unavoidable events qualify as defenses. UFLEX LIMITED VS STATE OF U. P. - 2016 0 Supreme(All) 1078- Judicial Linkage: Connected to impotentia excusat legem, where disability excuses duty. Jharkhand Quraish Panchayat and Shopkeeper Welfare Society VS State of Jharkhand - 2023 0 Supreme(Jhk) 658
Indian courts have consistently applied this maxim across civil, criminal, and constitutional matters. A landmark case is Re: Presidential Poll AIR 1974 SC 1682; (1974) 2 SCC 33, where the Supreme Court stated: when the law creates a duty or charge, and the party is disabled to perform it, without any default in him, and has no remedy over it, there the law will in general excuse him. Supervening impossibility, like acts of God, excuses the obligation. ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR VS KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL - 2020 4 Supreme 405
In Cochin State Power and Light Corporation Ltd. v. State of Kerala, the court explicitly invoked lex non cogit ad impossibilia to excuse impossible performance due to uncontrollable circumstances. ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR VS KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL - 2020 4 Supreme 405
Further, State of M.P. v. Narmada Bachao Andolan (2011) 7 SCC 639 reiterated that natural disasters preventing duty fulfillment trigger the maxim. V. H. Property Solution LLP VS State of Maharashtra - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 908
From additional precedents:- In Cannanore Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd., AIR 2002 SC 1841, the Supreme Court noted: The Latin Maxim referred to in the English judgement lex non cogit ad impossibilia also expressed as impotentia excusat iegem in common English acceptation means... A Constitution Bench... in Re Presidential Poll... held as under... This connects the maxims intimately. D. C. M. LTD. VS STATE OF U. P. - 2016 Supreme(All) 813- The Hon'ble Supreme Court approved the maxim's meaning in I.F.C.I. Ltd Vs..., stating Lex non cogit ad impossibilia, which means that law cannot compel a man to do what he cannot possibly do. STATE OF GUJARAT vs S A HIMNANI DISTRIBUTORS PVT LTD- In a tax appeal SHRI KRISHNANAGAR VAISHNVSAMAJ BHAVNAGAR vs THE ITO (EXEMPTION) BHAVNAGAR - 2025 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 4961>SHRI KRISHNANAGAR VAISHNVSAMAJ BHAVNAGAR vs THE ITO (EXEMPTION) BHAVNAGAR - 2025 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 4961, the court applied it squarely: Thus, the legal maxim lex non cogit ad impossibillia is squarely applicable... The doctrine of impossibility (lex non cogit ad inpossibilia) would be applicable... due to retrospective amendments creating absurd timelines for fund utilization.
These cases show the maxim's broad application, from constitutional polls to environmental and tax compliance.
The two maxims are intertwined. Impotentia excusat legem excuses performance due to unavoidable barriers like natural calamities or legal restrictions. Courts link them, as in Re Presidential Poll, where a Constitution Bench highlighted their connection: The maxim of law impotentia excusat legam is intimately connected with another maxim of law... D. C. M. LTD. VS STATE OF U. P. - 2016 Supreme(All) 813Jharkhand Quraish Panchayat and Shopkeeper Welfare Society VS State of Jharkhand - 2023 0 Supreme(Jhk) 658
In disciplinary proceedings Subhash Pachori vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh - 2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 7815>Subhash Pachori vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh - 2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 7815, the court invoked it for inquiry board composition: Hon’ble Supreme Court... has dwelled on doctrine of impossibility by taking note of latin maxim lex non cogit ad impossibilia--reported in 2011 (7) SCC 639... 'Lex non cogit ad impossibilia: the law does not compel a man to do that which he cannot possibly perform.' Alternative arrangements were allowed when qualified members were unavailable.
The doctrine is not a blanket excuse. Courts stress:- Impossibility must be supervening and beyond control—not due to negligence or default. ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR VS KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL - 2020 4 Supreme 405- Mere difficulty or inconvenience does not qualify; it must be objectively impossible. ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR VS KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL - 2020 4 Supreme 405- Does not apply if performance is theoretically possible with effort.
For instance, in a pollution control case D. C. M. LTD. VS STATE OF U. P. - 2016 Supreme(All) 813>D. C. M. LTD. VS STATE OF U. P. - 2016 Supreme(All) 813, no excuse was granted as standards were attainable: No material on record that standard prescribed by Board were not possible to attain—Petitioner to take all steps to comply...
In recruitment Sushil Kumar Singh VS State of U. P. - 2021 Supreme(All) 536>Sushil Kumar Singh VS State of U. P. - 2021 Supreme(All) 536, age relaxation was denied despite delays, as it would frustrate timely appointments: Court comes to inescapable conclusion that... no ground exists to accept petitioners’ claim... on ground of parity...
Other examples include name changes Rayaan Chawla VS University of Delhi - 2020 Supreme(Del) 532>Rayaan Chawla VS University of Delhi - 2020 Supreme(Del) 532: Reliance is placed on the maxim 'Lex non cogit ad impossibiia'... the petitioner cannot be required to perform the impossible... leading to practical solutions like 'changed name alias earlier name'. And in mesne profits Anil Kumar Khanna VS Indian Tourism Development Corporation Ltd - 2015 Supreme(Del) 1461>Anil Kumar Khanna VS Indian Tourism Development Corporation Ltd - 2015 Supreme(Del) 1461: The law does not compel a man to do that which he cannot possibly perform. The other maxim is LEX NON COGIT AD IMPOSSIBILIA... but liability persisted for wrongful possession.
When raising this defense:- Prove Objectivity: Demonstrate circumstances were insurmountable and beyond control. ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR VS KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL - 2020 4 Supreme 405- Gather Evidence: Use records of natural disasters, official notifications, etc.- Analyze Scope: Ensure it fits recognized applications; courts scrutinize closely.- Seek Alternatives: As in board composition cases, propose feasible solutions. Subhash Pachori vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh - 2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 7815
Legal professionals should reference precedents like Narmada Bachao or Presidential Poll to bolster arguments. V. H. Property Solution LLP VS State of Maharashtra - 2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 908ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR VS KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL - 2020 4 Supreme 405
The criminal court's judgment on Lex non cogit ad impossibilia upholds a humane approach: the law excuses true impossibility to avoid absurdity. From Supreme Court polls to everyday compliance, this maxim protects against uncontrollable events—but only genuine cases qualify.
Key Takeaways:- Valid for acts of God, disasters; not negligence. UFLEX LIMITED VS STATE OF U. P. - 2016 0 Supreme(All) 1078- Linked to impotentia excusat legem. Jharkhand Quraish Panchayat and Shopkeeper Welfare Society VS State of Jharkhand - 2023 0 Supreme(Jhk) 658- Requires proof of objective impossibility. ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR VS KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL - 2020 4 Supreme 405- Broadly applied but strictly limited.
Stay informed on these evolving principles, and remember: while powerful, they demand rigorous evidence. For tailored advice, reach out to a legal expert.
#LexNonCogit, #LegalMaxims, #ImpossibilityDefense
The well known maxim lex non cogit ad impossibillia comes into full play. It says that the law does not compel the impossible. In view of the matter, it is impossible to transfer the case to any other Tribunal or Court, there is no merit in this application. ... In case, the Court does so, by a judicial order, it will amount to legislation. The Court cannot usurp the function of a legislature in the garb of judicial process under our constitutional s....
C.S.T (1996) UPTC 1263 and the legal maxim of lex non cogit ad impossibillia, the Tribunal below was legally justified in upholding the order under Section 10B without adjudicating on the plea of the revisionist tha the requirement of furnishing Form-IIIB could not have been complied with after the repeal ... Swaraj Developers (2003) 6 SCC 659 , the Punjab and Haryana High Court decision in Hindustan Construction Company v. State of Haryana (2005) 141 STC 119 and the Delhi High #HL_STA....
This legal maxim "lex non cogit ad impossibillia" is squarely attracted to the facts and circumstances in the present case. ... It is well settled principle of law that the law does not compel a man to do that which he cannot possibly do and the said principle is well expressed in legal maxim, "lex non cogit ad impossibillia". ... The petitioner filed writ petition before this Court challenging th....
It was further observed that the other maxim is, lex non cogit ad impossibillia-the law does not compel a man to do which he cannot possibly perform. ... (7). ... deprived of the benefits on account of stay order issued by the Court. ... In the considered view of this Court and Honble Supreme Court in such matters where several disputed questions are involved specially in the contract matters, normally while exercising power under Article 226 of the ....
Cannanore Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd., AIR 2002 SC 1841, it was held as follows: ... “The Latin Maxim referred to in the English judgement “lex non cogit ad impossibilia” also expressed as “impotentia excusat iegem” in common English acceptation means, the ... A Constitution Bench of seven Hon’ble Judges in Re Presidential Pool, 1974 (2) SCC 33, held as under: ... “The maxim of law impotentia excusat legam is intimately connected with another maxim of law #HL_STAR....
Thus, the legal maxim lex non cogit ad impossibillia is squarely applicable in the present case. 5. The id. ... The doctrine of impossibility (lex non cogit ad inpossibilia) would be applicable in the situation when assessee would be left with no time to utilise the accumulated funds. ... Order pronounced in the open Court on this 3rd July, 2025.
“lex non cogit ad impossibilia”. ... “lex non cogit ad impossibilia” cannot be faulted. ... The other maxim is, lex non cogit ad impossibilia - the impossibilia” which means law does not compel a person to well as the aforementioned maxim to non suit the appellant.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court has approved the aforestated meaning of maxim “lex non cogit ad impossibilia” in the case of I.F.C.I. Ltd Vs. ... There is a well known legal maxim “Lex non cogit ad impossibilia”, which means that law cannot compel a man to do what he cannot possibly do. 37. ... Thus, in accordance with the maxim of law, Lex non cogit ad impossiblia, i....
Ltd., 2003 (56) RLT 465 would lead to a view that even the impossibility of performance of satisfying the MODVAT not availed condition by a recognized and valid Transferee would not entitle them to the benefit of the legal maxim LEX NON COGIT AD IMPOSSIBILIA and following CC (Mumbai) Vs. ... The question is : i) Whether the benefit of legal maxim LEX NON COGIT AND IMPOSSIBILIA would grant the eligibility to the benefit of the DEEC exemption notificat....
Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases where an impossible situation is created has dwelled on doctrine of impossibility by taking note of latin maxim lex non cogit ad impossibilia--reported in 2011 (7) SCC 639, it has been held as under:- “39. ... Another legal maxim which can be invoked to their aid is: “Lex non cogit ad impossibilia: the law does not compel a man to do that which he cannot possibly perform.”17. In Huda and another VS. Dr....
The doctrine of impossibility is based on the maxim “lex non cogit ad impossibilia”. Law is settled that Court shall not expect the State authorities to do what cannot possibly be performed by it. In Chandra Kishore Jha Vs. Mahavir Prasad and others, 1999 (8) SCC 266, the Supreme Court considered above-noted doctrine and observed as under in paragraph 17:-
Reliance is placed on the maxim "Lex non cogit ad impossibiia". Reliance is also placed on the judgment of this court in the case of Rohitash Institute of Elementary Education v. National Council for Teacher Education,2019 SCCOnLineDel 7532 to plead that the petitioner cannot be required to perform the impossible inasmuch as no law would require the same.
There is a well known maxim, “Lex Non Cogit ad impossibilia” Since neither such provision is capable of read down in such a manner so as to render it rational such a provision which require compliance just impossible, valid law. The law does not compel a man to do that which he cannot possibly perform. The other similarly recognized legal maxims are “Impotentia Excusat Legim” and “neon tenatur ad impossibilia.”
The law does not compel a man to do that which he cannot possibly perform. The other maxim is “LEX NON COGIT AD IMPOSSIBILIA” (Broom’s Legal Maxim-P. 162) – The law itself and the administration of it, said Sir W. Scott, with reference to an alleged infraction of the revenue laws, must yield to that to which everything must bend, to necessity; the law, in its most positive and peremptory injunctions, is understood to disclaim, as it does in its general aphorisms, all intention of compelling impossibilities, and the administration of laws must adopt that general exceptions i....
How the said right is to be exercised is a matter of procedure. Lex non cogit ad impossibillia is a well known maxim which means that nobody can be asked to do a thing which is impossible to be performed.
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
