https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198039 The court declined to entertain the petitioner's claim seeking a refund of a wrongfully withheld amount from a contract, emphasizing the presence of an arbitration agreement. Citing a previous judgment, the court reiterated that contractual matters should be resolved through arbitration or civil suits, not under Article 226 jurisdiction. Following precedent, the court dismissed the petition, directing the parties to utilize the arbitration agreement for dispute resolution. The judgment underscores the significance of arbitration agreements in contractual disputes and limits the court's intervention under Article 226, emphasizing adherence to contract terms for dispute resolution. en-us Wed, 13 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 21 Jan 2018 09:28:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198039 The court declined to entertain the petitioner's claim seeking a refund of a wrongfully withheld amount from a contract, emphasizing the presence of an arbitration agreement. Citing a previous judgment, the court reiterated that contractual matters should be resolved through arbitration or civil suits, not under Article 226 jurisdiction. Following precedent, the court dismissed the petition, directing the parties to utilize the arbitration agreement for dispute resolution. The judgment underscores the significance of arbitration agreements in contractual disputes and limits the court's intervention under Article 226, emphasizing adherence to contract terms for dispute resolution. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 13 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198039