Petitioner sought police protection for his land against alleged obstruction by the fourth respondent. The Court held the petitioner had an alternative remedy in Civil Court and disposed of the writ petition accordingly.
Petition disposed of; petitioner directed to approach competent Civil Court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
MONDAY, THE 16TH AUGUST 2010 / 25TH SRAVANA 1932
WP(C).No. 25744 of 2010(P)
PETITIONER(S):
JISHNU.V.DEV,S/O.E.N.VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI,AGED 28 YEARS,EDAMANA ILLAM,EDANADU PO, PALA VIA,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN 686 574.
BY ADV. SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS
RESPONDENT(S):
R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
W.P.(C) No.25744 of 2010-P
Dated, this the 16th day of August, 2010
J U D G M E N T
K.M.Joseph, J.
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the
following relief:
“to issue writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate effective and sufficient police protection to the life and property belongs to the petitioner and his men for the peaceful enjoyment and possession of the said property, which is situated in an extent of 651/2 cents of land comprised in Survey No.164/3 (re-survey No.37/10) and 28 cents of land comprised in Survey No.223 (re-survey No.43/8) of Kanipayyoor Village in SRO Kunnamkulam in Thrissur District covered by Exhibit P-1 without any threat or hindrance from 4th respondent and his men.”
having an extent of 65 1/2 cents from his father and he is the absolute owner of the property. Petitioner's father got the said property from one Santa Kumari who was the daughter of the elder brother of the petitioner's father as per will. Complaint is made against the 4th respondent. It is stated that the 4th respondent and his 3 henchmen are obstructing the work. Petitioner filed complaint to respondents 1 to 3.
WPC 25744/2010 -2-
alternative remedy by way of approaching competent Civil Court. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of relegating the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court. We, however, make it clear that, if the petitioner complains of commission of any cognizable offence by the 4th respondent or anyone else before the 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent shall take action in accordance with law.
(K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE.
(M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE.
MS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should grant police protection against alleged obstruction of property possession through a writ petition.
Jishnu.V.Dev
Superintendent of Police, Thrissur
Circle Inspector of Police, Kunnamkulam
Subinspector of Police, Kunnamkulam
Parameswaran Nair
K.M. Joseph
M.L. Joseph Francis
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
