https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196810 The court dismissed the petition seeking to quash letters alleging violations of a concession agreement and demanding Rs. 40 crores. It held that the existence of an arbitration clause does not bar writ jurisdiction but noted that contractual disputes with serious factual disputes are generally unsuitable for writ jurisdiction. The court directed the respondent to decide on the petitioner's representation within the specified timeframe, ensuring a hearing opportunity. en-us Wed, 20 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Dec 2017 16:45:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196810 The court dismissed the petition seeking to quash letters alleging violations of a concession agreement and demanding Rs. 40 crores. It held that the existence of an arbitration clause does not bar writ jurisdiction but noted that contractual disputes with serious factual disputes are generally unsuitable for writ jurisdiction. The court directed the respondent to decide on the petitioner's representation within the specified timeframe, ensuring a hearing opportunity. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 20 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196810