Dismissed

Islamic Study Centre v. State of Kerala and Others

Kerala HC29 Oct 2010WP(C)/32580/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought police protection against illegal occupation of property. The Court observed that a civil decree was pending execution and there was a civil dispute. Held that it was not a fit case for Court interference and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. Petitioner allowed to approach competent forum for execution of civil decree.

Islamic Study Centre Vs State of Kerala and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32580 of 2010(V) --------------------------

¶3

PETITIONER(S): ---------------

¶4

ISLAMIC STUDY CENTRE(REG.NO.104/90) T.C.15/1735,VAZHUTHACAUD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT,M.A.MEERAN PILLAI.

¶5

BY ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR

¶6

RESPONDENT(S):

¶7

¶8

STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE HOME SECRETARY,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001.

¶9

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CITY,THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

¶10

CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUSEUM POLICE STATION,MUSEUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶11

SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUSEUM POLICE STATION,MUSEUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶12

P.SELVARAJ,S/O.PONNUCHAMI GOUNDER, INDEEVARAM, A-37,MARUTHOORKADAVU, KARAMANA PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-02.

¶13

GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

**K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * *** W.P.C.No.32580 of 2010

¶16

Dated this the 29^th day of October 2010

¶17

J U D G M E N T

¶18

K.M.JOSEPH,J

¶19

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

¶20

i) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondents 2 to 4 to grant adequate and effective police protection to the petitioner to enjoy ½ undivided right over 21.50 cents of property comprised in Sy.No.12 of Thaycaud Village which is the subject matter of OS No.26/1994 on the file of the 1^st Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram from the threat and obstruction of 5^th respondent and his henchmen in the interest of justice.

¶21

Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:

¶22

The petitioner, a Society registered under the Travancore Cochin Literary Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955 is running a Cultural center by name Islamic Study center in their building in TC No.15/1735 at

¶23

¶24

W.P.C.No.32580 of 2010

¶25

Vazhuthacaud, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner purchased one half portion of property having an extent of 21 cents which lies on the immediate western side of property and building of the petitioner for the purpose of construction of a cultural complex. The property belonged to two co-owners. The vendor of the petitioner filed a suit for partition and ultimately it is decreed by the Sub Court and it is modified by Ext.P1 judgment of this Court by which both the co-owners including the vendor of the petitioner were allotted equal shares. A Special Leave Petition filed by the co-owner was dismissed. The Sub Court has passed a final decree allotting plot No.II in favour of the petitioner. The decree was passed on 25/09/2010. The party to the partition suit and who was the other co-owner died on 03/10/2010. After her death, there was an attempt to trespass into the property by some strangers on the instigation of the 5^th respondent. The 5^th respondent is stated to be a person who entered into an agreement with Smt.Ponnammal Hameed, the other co-owner for purchase of her share during her life time. On 09/10/2010, a board was erected as Election Committee Office of BJP in the building in the property. The petitioner

¶26

¶27

W.P.C.No.32580 of 2010

¶28

immediately filed Ext.P4 complaint to the 3^rd respondent. The 3^rd respondent took steps to remove the board and has removed the board on the following date. It is submitted that certain strangers who styled themselves as members of a voluntary organisation is now forcibly attempting to occupy the building on the instigation of the 5^th respondent. As part of their clandestine move, they are parking an ambulance van inside the compound of the property, obstructing the entry to the property. It is stated that the final decree passed on 25/09/2010 will have to be executed through the Court. In the event the strangers occupy the portions of the property in the manner as aforesaid, it will obstruct the smooth execution of the decree.

¶29

We have heard Adv.Sri.M.Sreekumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. We have seen the prayer. We notice that though a final decree was passed in September 2010, admittedly the decree is yet to be executed. The petitioner has purchased ½ share. No doubt, the allegations are raised against the 5^th respondent, who is said to be a person with whom the other co-owner of the vendor of the petitioner has entered into an agreement with.

¶30

¶31

W.P.C.No.32580 of 2010

¶32

We would think that in the circumstances of the case, it may not be a fit case for us to interfere with the matter and direct protection. The learned Government Pleader would also submit that there is a civil dispute between the parties and the matter is pending before the Civil court and without directions from the Civil court, they may not interfere in the matter.

¶33

Without prejudice to all the rights of the petitioner he may have in law to approach any competent forum, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶34

(K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE)

¶35

(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)

¶36

jsr

¶37

// True Copy// PA to Judge

¶38

W.P.C.No.32580 of 2010 5

¶39

¶40

W.P.C.No.32580 of 2010

¶41

K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.

¶42

.No. of 200

¶43

ORDER/JUDGMENT

¶44

30/082010

Islamic Study Centre v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Islamic Study Centre v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vanitha Narayanan Vs State of Kerala and Others

Stephenson and Others Vs City Police Commissioner, Kochi City and

Jeevan Sabu V.S. Vs State of Kerala

Vijayakumar Vs the Circle Inspector of Police

P.P.Arshad Vs S.I. of Police & Others

T.M.Moidunny Haji Vs Superintendent of Police