Urban space is shaped by the interplay of law, governance, and citizenship practices, an interplay through which friction over access, use, and ownership is often negotiated and resolved. Existing theories of spatial justice highlight how rights to space are constructed, contested, and mediated through laws, policies, and citizenship practices. These frameworks, treat spatial justice as either a philosophical ideal or a planning principle, without adequately engaging with it as the sum of these three parts. Bridging the gap, this paper proposes a cyclical model of spatial balance, whereby the judiciary, governance, and citizenship interact continuously to navigate and restore justice in urban space. By juxtaposing a context-based spatial inquiry with legal developments, the paper attempts to arrive at the lived experience of justice. Spatial balance, in this inquiry, is not a static notion, but a performative and negotiated outcome emerging from the intersection of the three actors. Using a qualitative, case-study-based approach, the paper analyses legal rulings, urban policies, and citizenship practices, focusing on street vending in India and the right to livelihood of street vendors in urban space. The study demonstrates how the three actors collectively mediate conflicts, illustrating the temporal and interdependent nature of urban rights.