Actus legis nemini facit injuriam
An act of the law does injury to no one
Explanation & origin:-
Origin: Medieval era in European countries
Explanation: As decided in the case of P.G.Pattabi vs Mythili [(2010  L.W 785)] that the maxim actus legis nemini facit injuriam denotes that no one could raise any objection or complain that he has been wronged by any steps legally taken by the Court. General meaning that is derived out of the maxim is that the bringing of a lawsuit by one party against another party does not harm the second party (other than a frivolous action). Therefore no one can be injured by any legal action. However, some laws may be detrimental to some person but that does not mean the act of law amounts to injury to that person.
Also Read: Doli Incapax
R.A. Arunachala Aiyar vs. C. Subbaramiah
Bench of Madras High Court held that Even otherwise, in abnormal situations like strike in question, which can hardly be resisted by any litigant by applying any amount of skill or ability of his own, the courts should not insist for strict adherence to the procedural law so as to prejudice the interest of such litigants. In legal sense such incidents are well covered by the expression Acts of God. (See Halsbury’s Laws of England, Fourth Edition, Vol. 9, para 458). Therefore, the maxim Actus
Also Read: De Minimis Non Curat Lex
Baburao Ganpatro Tirmalle vs Bhimappa Venkappa Kandakur [ILR 1996 KAR 1565]
In this case, the Court is bound to invoke the principle actus legis nemini facit injuriam and do Justice to the aggrieved. The Court has then to pass appropriate orders permitting the tenant to reconstruct the premises in terms of its earlier order passed and if feasible in accordance with the approved plan and only to the extent it need accommodate the tenant and not beyond that. The expenses incurred in this behalf has to be made good by the landlord.
Also Read: Actus Non Facit Reum Nisi Mens Sit Rea