https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13854 A writ petition seeking payment of a reward amount was held unsuitable for adjudication under Article 226 where entitlement and quantum depended on disputed facts. The claim turned on rival factual assertions about the tax recovered on the basis of the petitioner's information and the amount allegedly payable as reward. The respondents disputed the petitioner's computation, and no rejoinder was filed to controvert those averments. The court noted that writ jurisdiction does not extend to investigation or determination of pure factual controversies, and the petitioner was left to seek relief before the competent civil court. en-us Tue, 12 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Jul 2009 12:52:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13854 A writ petition seeking payment of a reward amount was held unsuitable for adjudication under Article 226 where entitlement and quantum depended on disputed facts. The claim turned on rival factual assertions about the tax recovered on the basis of the petitioner's information and the amount allegedly payable as reward. The respondents disputed the petitioner's computation, and no rejoinder was filed to controvert those averments. The court noted that writ jurisdiction does not extend to investigation or determination of pure factual controversies, and the petitioner was left to seek relief before the competent civil court. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 12 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13854