https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180590 A writ petition under Article 226 cannot be rejected merely because some issues involve disputed facts; the court may decline only where the controversy is too complex for writ adjudication or requires oral evidence. On the pleadings, the material was largely documentary, so dismissal in limine on that ground was not justified. In acquisition matters, a purchaser after a Section 4 notification is not barred from challenging the notification where it is alleged to be vague and to fail to identify the land with reasonable certainty, because adequate notice and an opportunity to object under Section 5A remain essential unless validly dispensed with under Section 17(4). en-us Thu, 04 Dec 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Mar 2016 11:58:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180590 A writ petition under Article 226 cannot be rejected merely because some issues involve disputed facts; the court may decline only where the controversy is too complex for writ adjudication or requires oral evidence. On the pleadings, the material was largely documentary, so dismissal in limine on that ground was not justified. In acquisition matters, a purchaser after a Section 4 notification is not barred from challenging the notification where it is alleged to be vague and to fail to identify the land with reasonable certainty, because adequate notice and an opportunity to object under Section 5A remain essential unless validly dispensed with under Section 17(4). Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 04 Dec 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180590