Definition
Judicial relief that the court may grant or refuse in its sound discretion, even where the applicant has established a legal or equitable right — as opposed to ex debito justitiae (relief granted as of right).
Most equitable reliefs in Indian law are discretionary — the court may refuse to grant them even if the applicant proves their entitlement, if the court determines that equitable considerations weigh against the grant. Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 makes specific performance discretionary: the court is not bound to grant it merely because it is legally available. Perpetual injunctions, declarations, and mandatory injunctions are all discretionary. The court's discretion must be exercised judicially — not arbitrarily, not capriciously, but on settled legal principles. A person who seeks equity must come with clean hands (clean hands doctrine); a person who has delayed without sufficient cause may be denied equitable relief on the ground of laches.
Statutory Definition
Section 20(1), Specific Relief Act, 1963: 'The jurisdiction to decree specific performance is discretionary, and the court is not bound to grant such relief merely because it is lawful to do so; the discretion of the court is not arbitrary but sound and reasonable, guided by judicial principles and capable of correction by a court of appeal.' Section 36 SRA: 'Preventive relief is granted at the discretion of the court by injunction, temporary or perpetual.'
Etymology & Origin
From Latin 'discretionarius' (of or relating to discretion) from 'discretio' (separation, discernment, judgment) from 'discernere' (to separate, to discern). Discretionary relief is relief within the court's 'discernment' — its judgment about whether to grant it based on all the equitable circumstances.
Full Legal Analysis
Discretionary Relief: Equity at the Judge’s Discretion
The division between rights and remedies is crucial in law: establishing a right does not automatically entitle the right-holder to every possible remedy. Equitable remedies — specific performance, injunctions, declarations — are given at the court’s discretion, calibrated to the justice of the specific case. This discretion protects the court from being compelled to produce unjust results by the mechanical application of legal rules to inequitable situations.
Grounds for Refusing Discretionary Relief
Courts refuse discretionary relief on the following grounds: (a) Unclean hands: The applicant has acted unconscionably or in bad faith in relation to the subject matter of the suit — equity will not assist those who have not behaved equitably. (b) Laches: The applicant has inexcusably delayed seeking relief — equity assists the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights. (c) Hardship to the defendant: Granting the relief would cause the defendant greater hardship than the plaintiff would suffer by refusal — equity balances hardships. (d) Conduct of the plaintiff: Plaintiff has breached their own obligations (unclean hands in the specific transaction). (e) Public interest: Granting the relief would harm the public interest or third parties significantly.
Judicially Guided Discretion
The Supreme Court has consistently held that the court's discretion in granting equitable relief must be judicially guided — not arbitrary. In J.P. Builders v. A. Ramadas Rao (2011) 1 SCC 429, the Court held: 'The discretion to refuse specific performance should be exercised with care. A refusal is justified where the plaintiff's conduct, the terms of the contract, or the surrounding circumstances make it inequitable to decree specific performance.' The discretion cannot be used to defeat clearly established contractual rights without a principled reason.
“Discretionary relief is the law's acknowledgement that rules, mechanically applied, can produce injustice. The court's discretion is the space for justice that cannot be captured by rules — for the case where the legal entitlement is clear but granting it would be wrong. It is powerful precisely because it is bounded by principle.”
This Term in Indian Statutes
Specific Relief Act, 1963, 1963
"The jurisdiction to decree specific performance is discretionary, and the court is not bound to grant such relief merely because it is lawful to do so; the discretion of the court is not arbitrary but sound and reasonable, guided by judicial principles and capable of correction by a court of appeal."
Specific performance is discretionary — court may refuse even if legally available; discretion is judicially guided
