https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14112 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is ordinarily declined where an effective alternative civil remedy exists, especially when the dispute turns on title to property. The Court treated the petitioner's claim as one requiring adjudication of title, which is better suited to a civil suit under Rule 11(6) of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act. In the absence of any extraordinary circumstance, the petitioner was required to pursue that statutory remedy rather than seek writ relief. The petition was therefore not entertained and the petitioner was relegated to the civil remedy. en-us Fri, 03 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:04:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14112 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is ordinarily declined where an effective alternative civil remedy exists, especially when the dispute turns on title to property. The Court treated the petitioner's claim as one requiring adjudication of title, which is better suited to a civil suit under Rule 11(6) of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act. In the absence of any extraordinary circumstance, the petitioner was required to pursue that statutory remedy rather than seek writ relief. The petition was therefore not entertained and the petitioner was relegated to the civil remedy. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 03 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14112