- (1.) R. H. Zaidi, J. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S. Mohan, Advocate, who has appeared for respondent No. 3 and also perused the record.
(2.) BY means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorariquashing the recovery certificate dated 22-10-1999 issued by respondent No. 3. Other consequential prayers have also been made. Learned Counsel for the contesting respondent raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition. It was submitted that the petitioner has already approached the Consumer Forum and filed Case No. 12 of 2000 against respondent No. 3 and another on the same facts on which the present petition has been filed, a copy of which is contained in Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition, which is pending disposal, therefore, he has got no right to approach this Court and file the present petition. It is well-settled law that same case cannot be permitted to be litigated at two forums. The writ petition as framed and filed is legally not maintainable. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that he will advise the petitioner either to withdraw the case from the Consumer Forum or to delete at least the names of the respondents from array of parties in the abovenoted case. But, at present, admittedly, the abovenoted case is pending disposal before the Consumer Forum.
(3.) IN view of the abovenoted facts I decline to entertain the present petition with liberty to the petitioner to file another petition with regard to the amount of loan taken from respondent No. 3. So far as the amount of compensation from the insurance company is concerned, the petitioner may claim the same from the insurance company in accordance with the law. With these observations and directions, this petition is disposed of finally. Petition disposed of. .;