https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171985 Mere availability of a civil suit does not create an automatic bar to writ jurisdiction under Article 226, even where title and factual issues are disputed. The court must first assess whether the controversy is so serious or complex that it genuinely requires a full trial before relegating the petitioner to civil court. On the record, the refusal to entertain the writ was not sustainable because the alleged vesting by the municipal body had not been properly examined. However, the open space had already been treated as reserved for community use, so the respondents were allowed to complete the remaining development work and the petitioner was left to pursue any lawful compensation claim in the appropriate forum. en-us Mon, 10 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Oct 2015 21:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171985 Mere availability of a civil suit does not create an automatic bar to writ jurisdiction under Article 226, even where title and factual issues are disputed. The court must first assess whether the controversy is so serious or complex that it genuinely requires a full trial before relegating the petitioner to civil court. On the record, the refusal to entertain the writ was not sustainable because the alleged vesting by the municipal body had not been properly examined. However, the open space had already been treated as reserved for community use, so the respondents were allowed to complete the remaining development work and the petitioner was left to pursue any lawful compensation claim in the appropriate forum. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 10 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171985