Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Saturday, 08 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-12-03 allowed

Roshina T vs Abdul Azeez K.T. & Ors

Bench: 2 — Abhay Manohar Sapre

In Brief

In this appeal, the Supreme Court set aside a High Court order that had granted a writ of mandamus requiring the appellant to restore possession of a flat to the respondent. The Court held that disputes over property possession between private individuals are not suitable for resolution through writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution. Such disputes involve pure questions of fact that must be decided by civil courts, not through extraordinary constitutional remedies. The Court allowed the appeal, dismissed the writ petition, and granted liberty to the parties to pursue their claims through regular civil proceedings.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Writ Jurisdiction Property Law Article 226

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login