Writ Jurisdiction Not For Deciding ‘Hotly Disputed Questions Of Facts’, Reiterates Supreme Court

Published by Admin on

Writ Jurisdiction Not For Deciding ‘Hotly Disputed Questions Of Facts’, Reiterates Supreme Court

Case: Shubas Jain vs. Rajeshwari Shivam

Coram: Justices Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian

Case No: [CA 2848 OF 2021]

Court Observation: “It is well settled that the High Court exercising its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, does not adjudicate hotly disputed questions of facts. It is not for the High Court to make a comparative assessment of conflicting technical reports and decide which one is acceptable.”

When you will read the order you will find that the leave has been granted. The appeal is allowed for the reasons discussed in the signed non-reportable judgment. The impugned final judgment and order is set aside and the writ petition is dismissed.

All interim orders stand vacated. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly.

Download Judgement

Previous Judgments

Lender Who Advanced Interest-Free Loans to Corporate Body is also A Financial Creditor; can Initiate CIRP: Supreme Court

No Need To Examine Complainant Before Ordering Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC: Supreme Court

Bogus Voting & Booth Capturing Affects Rule Of Law & Democracy; Should Be Dealt With Iron Hands: Supreme Court

Sanction U/S 197 CrPC Required To Prosecute Public Servants If Alleged Act Committed Is Directly Concerned With Official Duty: Supreme CourtDirectly Download Judgment

Power Of Compounding Must Be Expressly Conferred By Statute Which Creates Offence: Supreme CourtDirectly Download Judgment

God Will Forgive Us If Religious Institutions Are Affected By National Highway Development: Kerala High CourtDirectly Download Judgment


Writ jurisdiction, High Court, Article 226, Questions Of Facts


Leave a Reply

Hey, wait!

Don't forget to subscribe to our newsletter for weekly updates about our events, blogs and various opportunities.