There is an old legal maxim that justice delayed is justice denied. It is quoted so often that it risks becoming a cliché. Yet clichés usually survive because they contain an uncomfortable truth.Few people understand that truth better than Subash Mahajan, an 80-year-old British-based Non-Resident Indian who happens to be my father-in-law. Mr Mahajan is the lead claimant in a consumer dispute arising from the purchase of an apartment in Greater Noida. Together with eight other purchasers, he began legal proceedings in 2009 after challenging additional demands made by the developer.This is a typical story of NRIs from abroad investing in the motherland. Five of the original claimants eventually abandoned the litigation, worn down by years of delay. Mr Mahajan and three others persevered.
One image from this year captures the human cost better than any legal citation. Frail, breathless and living with severe heart failure, Mr Mahajan travelled to Central London during the visit of the Chief Justice of India to personally hand-deliver a letter. It was not a demand that the courts rule in his favour. It was a plea for something far more modest: please decide the case—one way or the other—while I am still alive to hear the judgment.
Over the past seventeen years, Mr Mahajan has pursued every lawful avenue available to him. The dispute has been heard by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and has also reached the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. I personally, a barrister myself, have read every document starting from before I even married his daughter and he was just a stranger asking me for help. I've visited his lawyers in person in Delhi - they're actually good, albeit exasperated themselves.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court subsequently directed the State Commission to dispose of the matter within six months from 18 December 2024. Those directions have still not resulted in a final determination.
Mr Mahajan has written respectfully to judges, parliamentarians, legal leaders, journalists and public institutions, Members of the UK House of Lords (Baroness Verma immediately called to set up a meeting), not to seek special treatment or to influence the outcome of the proceedings, but simply to ask a question that many ordinary litigants might ask: if directions from two higher judicial bodies do not result in a case being concluded, what practical remedy remains available - especially after 17 years of litigation?
Whether one agrees with every aspect of Mr Mahajan's claim is almost beside the point. Every delayed case has a human face. For Mr Mahajan, the issue is no longer whether he wins or loses. It is whether justice will arrive before time itself renders the outcome academic. My father in law is not bothered about the the case so much as the principle. And now, with my help, he has begun a campaign to contact every UK and Indian journalist who covers such matters, every politician, diplomat. I'll keep you posted.
