Discrtion of judges

In 1617 it was John Seldon, who describe equity as a rougish thing. Equity is according to the conscience of him who is Chancellor,. as it is larger or narrower so is equity call as Chancellors foot. It is a charming metaphor. Standard measure of a foot is certain. It is 12 inches. But the Chancellor's foot maybe anything from 9 inches to 11 inches. So equity is personal to him. It varies as much as the foot of one Lord Chancellor varies from that of his successor. So is with today's discreation of the Judge.

"Discretion"- the word in simple meaning carries some meaning i.e. to do something from his own power.  But in judicial context  it carries very important meaning.  Many cantena of judgments says that discretion should be exercised judicially - in not routine manner- but to subserve the field of justice.  Even where there are no express provisions for redressal of a particular grievance or where there are -but technical- in such situation- it is-"Power"/"discretion"  always lies with a Judge- who is bound to exercise for holding the field of justice and not giving way to abuse the field of justice- Judicial exercise  of discretion-definitely carries meaningful view to hold-that it in no way hamper or defeat the justice between the parties to a lis - in view of a settled principle of law that "justice should not only be done but it should be seen to have been done"