https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325887 The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's decision in a contractual dispute over a terminated road improvement contract. The Court emphasized that the High Court should not have entertained the writ petition involving disputed facts and should have avoided appointing a Commission for fact-finding. It reiterated that contractual disputes with disputed facts should be resolved in civil courts, not through writ jurisdiction. The Supreme Court highlighted that the appropriate legal forum for such disputes is where evidence can be properly examined, and exceptions for writ jurisdiction exist only in specific circumstances. No costs were imposed in this case. en-us Fri, 14 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Apr 2016 10:51:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325887 The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's decision in a contractual dispute over a terminated road improvement contract. The Court emphasized that the High Court should not have entertained the writ petition involving disputed facts and should have avoided appointing a Commission for fact-finding. It reiterated that contractual disputes with disputed facts should be resolved in civil courts, not through writ jurisdiction. The Supreme Court highlighted that the appropriate legal forum for such disputes is where evidence can be properly examined, and exceptions for writ jurisdiction exist only in specific circumstances. No costs were imposed in this case. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 14 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325887