Suppression of material facts and parallel remedies bar interference when a pending writ petition is concealed in appeal.

Parallel pursuit of remedies for the same cause of action is impermissible, and concealment of a pending writ petition was treated as suppression of a material fact. The non-disclosure was regarded as abuse of process and as conduct disentitling the appellant from seeking interference in the appeal challenging admission of the section 9 application. The appeal was therefore not entertained and was dismissed because the appellant had filed and pursued simultaneous proceedings without disclosure.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal challenging admission of the section 9 application could be entertained when a writ petition on the same cause of action had already been filed and was pending, and the fact of such parallel proceedings had not been disclosed.

Analysis: A litigant is not entitled to pursue two simultaneous remedies for the same cause of action. Non-disclosure of the pending writ petition amounted to concealment of a material fact. Such conduct was treated as an abuse of the process of law and as conduct disentitling the appellant from seeking interference in the appeal.

Conclusion: The appeal was not entertained and was dismissed because of the appellant's misconduct in suppressing the pendency of the writ petition and pursuing parallel remedies.

---