Disposed

C.A Joy v. the Superintendent of Police,Aluva 683101

Kerala HC8 Jan 2016WP(C)/632/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition where the petitioner sought police protection and an injunction against obstruction to his shop. The Court directed Respondents 2 and 3 to ensure no obstruction by Respondents 4 to 12 regarding access to the shop but did not preclude the State's right to acquire the premises.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 2 and 3 directed to ensure no obstruction by Respondents 4 to 12 regarding ingress and egress to the petitioner's shop premises.

C.A Joy Vs the Superintendent of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/18TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 632 of 2016 (D)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

C.A JOY, AGED 48 YEARS S/O.C.P.ANTONY, CHAKKIATH HOUSE, CHALAKKA NORTH KUTHIYATHODU, NORTH PARAVUR.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR SMT.V.SHYLAJA

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALUVA-683101.

¶11

2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALUVA-683101.

¶12

3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGAMANDADU POLICE STATION, CHENGAMANADU-683578.

¶13

4. T.P.SEBASTIAN,, AGED 45 YEARS (FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, KUTTIPUZHA, KUNNUKARA-683578.

¶14

5. D.RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 58 YEARS (FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) AAKULATHPARAMBU(NISHA NIVAS) NORTH KUTHIYATHODU-683594.

¶15

6. C.E.JABAN,, AGED 54 YEARS FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER PATHUPARAYIL HOUSE, VAYANKARA, KUNNUKARA.P.O-683578.

¶16

7. K.H.BAKKAR,, AGED 48 YEARS FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER KONNAMVEETIL, CHALAKKA, KUTHIYATHODU-683594.

¶17

8. SHIBI PUTHUSSERY,, AGED 38 YEARS FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER KUTTIPUZHA, KUNNUKARA-683578.

¶18

9. SHIBIN,, AGED 36 YEARS FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER THELATHURUTHU, NORTH KUTHIYATHODU-683594.

¶19

WP(C).No. 632 of 2016 (D)

¶20

10. M.A.JABAR,, AGED 52 YEARS FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER MANNAYIKUDATHU, KUNNUKARA.P.O-683578.

¶21

11. P.A.TAHIR,, AGED 40 YEARS FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER THAZHATUVEETTIL, PALLAM, VAYALKARA KUNNUKARA.P.O-6835678.

¶22

12. M.A.SUDHEER, AGED 44 YEARS FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER ADUVASSERY.P.O.-683578.

¶23

R1 TO 3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. C.R. SYAM KUMAR.

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

WP(C).No. 632 of 2016 (D)

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶28

P1 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED 4/6/2015.

¶29

P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORTED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 4/1/2016 IN RESPECT OF IN DHARNA CONDUCTED BY RESPONDENTS 4 TO 12.

¶30

P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE LOCKS AND FLAGS IN FRONT OF THE SHOPS.

¶31

P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 2/1/16.

¶32

P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 THROUGH REGISTERED POST AND DIRECTILY.

¶33

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE.

kp/-

ASHOK BHUSHAN, CJ & A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶38

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶39

W.P(C). No. 632 of 2016

¶40

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 8^th day of January, 2016

¶41

JUDGMENT

¶42

ASHOK BHUSHAN, CJ.

¶43

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Notice to the party respondents is not necessary in view of the order being passed. Respondents 4 to 6 are at liberty to make an application for variation or modification if they are aggrieved.

¶44

Petitioner filed the writ petition with a prayer seeking police protection. Petitioner's case is that, he is the owner of the shop room situate in 35 cents of property owned by him. It is stated that obstruction has been caused by respondents 4 to 12 in running the shop as the land where the shop is situated is to be acquired for construction of approach road to the Koran Kadavu bridge. As the land value has not been finalized, the petitioner did not agree to give the land and the same has not been acquired yet.

¶45

The learned Government Pleader submitted that acquisition proceedings has not been completed. Although steps were taken to finalize the proceedings, the bridge constructed is yet to be inaugurated and which is due to the obstruction created by the shop. Be that as it may, as the shop is not acquired, the petitioner is entitled

¶46

W.P.C. No. 632 of 2016

¶47

-2-

¶48

to use his shop. Respondents 2 and 3 shall ensure that no obstruction is being caused by respondents 4 to 12 regarding the ingress and egress into the shop and do such activities as permissible under law.

¶49

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. This however shall not preclude the right of the State on taking steps for acquisition of the shop premises.

¶50

Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶51

Sd/-

¶52

A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE

¶53

kp/-8.01.16

C.A Joy v. the Superintendent of Police,Aluva 683101

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.A Joy v. the Superintendent of Police,Aluva 683101

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

Sojan George Vs Siji

Nandakumar Vs P.S. Krishna Pillai

Manmith T.N. Vs the Chief Manager

The Kasaragod District Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs Radha K.A.

R.Gokul Prasad Vs Union of India and Others

Shiju Raphel Vs Inspector of Police