Dismissed

K.V. Joseph v. Deputy Superintendent of Police

Kerala HC8 Apr 2013WP(C)/8737/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ relief alleging police inaction in providing protection against threats from respondents involved in business dealings. Respondents submitted there was no threat. Court disposed of petition without prejudice to respondents' right to seek legal remedies for dues. Judgment delivered on 08-04-2013.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed without prejudice to respondents' right to seek legal remedies for recovery of dues.

K.V. Joseph Vs Deputy Superintendent of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶5

MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2013/18TH CHAITHRA 1935

¶6

WP(C).No. 8737 of 2013 (N)

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

K.V. JOSEPH DEEPTHI AGENCIES, NEAR RILWAY STATION, CHANGANACHERRY S/O. VARGHESE, AGED 60 YEARS RESIDING AT APPACHERIL HOUSE, VAZHAPPALLY CHANGANACHERRY.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.G.SUKUMARA MENON

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM - 686 101.

¶12

2. FAZIL PRESIDENT, VYAPARI VYVASAYI SAMITHI REG. NO. CCR.72/89, CHANGANACHERRY - 686 101.

¶13

3. NASSAR SECRETARY, VYAPARI VYVASAYI SAMITHI REG. NO. CCR.72/89, CHANGANACHERRY - 686 101.

¶14

4. MURALI

¶15

PROPRIETOR, POONAM COMMUNICATIONS, MUNCIPAL ARCADE KAVALA, CHANGANCHERRY - 686 101.

¶16

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.K.ABOOBACKER R2-R4 BY ADV. SRI.RAJ MOHAN R.PILLAI

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-04-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

WP(C).No. 8737 of 2013 (N)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION.

¶23

EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 06/01/2013 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT.

¶24

EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 14/01/2013 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT.

¶25

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL

/ TRUE COPY /

P.A. TO JUDGE

K.M.JOSEPH & K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JJ.

¶30

¶31

W.P.(C) No.8737 of 2013

¶32

Dated, this the 8^th day of April, 2013

¶33

J U D G M E N T

¶34

K.M.Joseph, J.

¶35

Petitioner has approached this Court complaining of inaction of the police in the matter of providing protection.

¶36

Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is conducting a shop. Respondents 2 to 4 are creating threat. There are some dealings between the 4^th respondent and the petitioner's son, on enquiry it is found and the son is working in Dubai. Counter affidavit is filed by the party respondents.

¶37

Today, when the matter came up, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the shop is already opened. Learned counsel for the party respondents submits that there will be no threat to the life of the petitioner and his wife. We record the said submission and dispose of the writ petition. This will be without prejudice to the right of the party respondents to seek legal remedies for realization of any amount due to them.

¶38

(K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE.

¶39

( K.RAMAKRISHNAN) JUDGE.

¶40

K.V. Joseph v. Deputy Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.V. Joseph v. Deputy Superintendent of Police

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

Chandrika Vs the Superintendent of Police, Kollam

T.K. Thampi Vs the District Police Chief (Rural)

T.K.Santhosh Vs S.K.Rajappan Achari

Indus Towers Limited Vs the S.I. of Police, Atholi Police Station

Indus Towers Limited Vs the S.I. of Police, Taliparamba

Joseph Santiago Vs State Ofkerala