https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108657 A writ petition challenging a Debt Recovery Tribunal recovery notice was not entertained because the petitioner had an adequate statutory remedy before the Tribunal. Reliance on an earlier Tehsildar order was treated as a defence to be raised in the pending recovery proceedings, along with all factual and legal objections in a written statement. The writ court declined to examine disputed questions of fact or law at that stage, particularly where no prejudice was shown. The petitioner was directed to pursue its objections before the Tribunal in the recovery proceedings. en-us Thu, 02 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Apr 2012 12:29:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108657 A writ petition challenging a Debt Recovery Tribunal recovery notice was not entertained because the petitioner had an adequate statutory remedy before the Tribunal. Reliance on an earlier Tehsildar order was treated as a defence to be raised in the pending recovery proceedings, along with all factual and legal objections in a written statement. The writ court declined to examine disputed questions of fact or law at that stage, particularly where no prejudice was shown. The petitioner was directed to pursue its objections before the Tribunal in the recovery proceedings. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 02 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108657