https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198351 A civil suit challenging threatened demolition and sealing was held barred because the municipal statute provided a complete notice-and-appeal framework, including further appellate review. The Court applied the principle that civil jurisdiction should not be invoked where an efficacious statutory remedy exists, and that intervention is limited to cases of patent lack of jurisdiction or action outside the statute. Since the plaint sought injunction relief despite the available statutory mechanism and did not show a jurisdictional nullity, the suit was not maintainable and the plaint was liable to be rejected. en-us Sun, 01 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Jan 2018 18:09:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198351 A civil suit challenging threatened demolition and sealing was held barred because the municipal statute provided a complete notice-and-appeal framework, including further appellate review. The Court applied the principle that civil jurisdiction should not be invoked where an efficacious statutory remedy exists, and that intervention is limited to cases of patent lack of jurisdiction or action outside the statute. Since the plaint sought injunction relief despite the available statutory mechanism and did not show a jurisdictional nullity, the suit was not maintainable and the plaint was liable to be rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Sun, 01 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198351