https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194572 A writ court should not determine limitation where the plea is a mixed question of law and fact and the factual foundation has not been established. Here, the High Court decided in writ jurisdiction that the claim against added parties was time-barred without disclosing the factual basis for that conclusion, although limitation had not been properly determined before the Registrar or the Single Judge. The Supreme Court held that the High Court ought not to have exercised Article 226 jurisdiction on that issue, and the matter could still be raised before the Registrar in the pending proceedings. The High Court's limitation ruling was unsustainable, and the appeals were allowed. en-us Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Sep 2017 14:27:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194572 A writ court should not determine limitation where the plea is a mixed question of law and fact and the factual foundation has not been established. Here, the High Court decided in writ jurisdiction that the claim against added parties was time-barred without disclosing the factual basis for that conclusion, although limitation had not been properly determined before the Registrar or the Single Judge. The Supreme Court held that the High Court ought not to have exercised Article 226 jurisdiction on that issue, and the matter could still be raised before the Registrar in the pending proceedings. The High Court's limitation ruling was unsustainable, and the appeals were allowed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194572