Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

High Court Dismisses Petition on Grounds of Delay and Laches: ‘Delay Brings in Hazard and Causes Injury to the Lis

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


High Court of Punjab and Haryana  dismissed a petition challenging the acceptance of a voluntary resignation by an employee of the Punjab National Bank. The decision, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal, underscored the importance of timeliness in seeking legal redress.

The petitioners, Tara Chand Arora and another, approached the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to set aside an order accepting the resignation of petitioner No. 2, who had claimed medical incapacity due to Schizophrenia. However, the court observed significant discrepancies in the documents presented and noted a considerable delay in the approach to the court.

In his judgment, Justice Bansal emphasized, “Delay does bring in hazard and causes injury to the lis.” This observation formed the cornerstone of the court’s decision, highlighting the principle that inordinate delay in seeking legal remedy can be detrimental to the legitimacy of a claim.

The court also pointed out the lack of substantive evidence supporting the petitioner’s claim of mental illness and coercion by the bank. The petitioner’s resignation, accepted by the bank in 2010, was only challenged six years later, raising questions about the delay.

The judgment referenced several key cases, including ‘Eastern Coalfields Ltd. V. Dugal Kumar’ and ‘Tilokchand Motichand v. H.B. Munshi’, underscoring the principle that delay and laches are critical considerations in exercising the writ jurisdiction under Article 226.

This ruling serves as a significant reminder of the importance of timely legal action and the high standards required for documentation in legal proceedings. The case was represented by Mr. H.C. Arora and Ms. Sunaina for the petitioners, and Mr. Madan Gupta for the respondents.

Date of Decision: 07.11.2023

Tara Chand Arora and Another VS Punjab National Bank and Others     

Latest Legal News