This judgment dismisses the writ petition challenging a dispute over property boundaries and construction. The court held that requiring police protection in a civil dispute is not maintainable. The petition was dismissed in limine.
The writ petition was dismissed in limine.
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 C.K.ABDUL REHIM
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1941
WP(C).No.17102 of 2019
PETITIONER:
P.C.KRISHNA PILLAI AGED 61 YEARS S/O.K.CHELLAPPAN PILLAI, SAUMYA NIVAS, KANDIYOOR, THATTARAMBALAM P.O., MAVELIKKARA
BY ADVS. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY SMT.ALIKA M MURALIDHAR SRI.EBIN MATHEW SRI.P.ROHIT PREMANANDAN SHENOY
RESPONDENTS:
WP(C).No.17102 of 2019
2
5 K.SREEKALA, D/O. CHELLAPPAN PILLAI, PANAMBILAVIL THEKKETHIL, KANDIYOOR, THATTARAMBALAM P.O., MAVELIKKARA,PIN-690 103
SR.GP-SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.17102 of 2019
3
C.K. ABDUL REHIM
&
R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, JJ.
W.P(C) No. 17102 of 2019
----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of June, 2019
JUDGMENT
Abdul Rehim,J
The above writ petition is filed mainly seeking the following
reliefs:
“A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing respondents 1 and 2 to provide effective, adequate police protection to the petitioner and his representatives, to remove the 2 fencing posts installed illegally by respondents 3 to 5 in the middle of his own pathway, purporting to divide his pathway into 2 parts, and to continue and to complete the constructions as per Ext.P9 building permit and approved plan, without any illegal obstruction, intimidation, threats or abuse from respondents 3 to 5 and/or their agents, relatives or representatives in any whatsoever.”
Granting Police protection when such a dispute is in existence, is against all settled precedents of this court as well as the Honourable
WP(C).No.17102 of 2019
4
Supreme Court. Hence we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition.
Consequently, the above writ petition is hereby
dismissed as inlimine.
Sd/-C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE
Sd/-R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, JUDGE
lsn
WP(C).No.17102 of 2019
5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT P1 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY LOCATION SKETCH NO.254/2019 DATED 29/4/2019 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ,MAVELIKKARA VILLAGE |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P2 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT NO.1268191 DATED 20/4/2019 |
| EXHIBIT P2(a) | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT NO.1268190 DATED 20/4/2019 |
| EXHIBIT P2 B | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT NO.1268193 DATED 20/4/2019 |
| EXHIBIT P3 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF POSSESSION CERTIFICATE NO37356409 DATED 10/1/2019 |
| EXHIBIT P4 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF POSSESSION CERTIFICATE NO.37356459 DATED 10/1/2019 |
| EXHIBIT P5 | A DETAILED SURVEY SKETCH SHOWING THE LIE OF THE PROPERTIES OF THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 |
| EXHIBIT P6 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF SALE DEED NO.1167/2016,DATED 11/7/2016 |
| EXHIBIT P7 | PHOTOGRAPH OF THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTED BY THE PETITIONER IN HIS PROPERTY IN RE.SY 33/21 |
| EXHIBIT P8 | PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY SHOWING THE PATHWAY IN SY.NO.33/21,IN BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED BY THE PETITIONER IN HIS PROPERTIES IN RE.SY.NO.33/20 AND 33/21 |
| EXHIBIT P8(a) | PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY SHOWING THE PATHWAY IN SY.NO.33/21,IN BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED BY THE PETITIONER IN HIS PROPERTIES IN RE.SY.NO.33/20 AND 33/21 |
| EXHIBIT P8(b) | PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY SHOWING THE PATHWAY IN SY.NO.33/21,IN BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED BY THE PETITIONER IN HIS PROPERTIES IN RE.SY.NO.33/20 AND 33/21 |
| EXHIBIT P8(c) | PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY SHOWING THE |
WP(C).No.17102 of 2019
6
| PATHWAY IN SY.NO.33/21,IN BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED BY THE PETITIONER IN HIS PROPERTIES IN RE.SY.NO.33/20 AND 33/21 |
|
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P9 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BUILDING PERMIT DATED 16/1/2019 AND APPROVED PLANS |
| EXHIBIT P10 | PHOTOGRAPH PATHWAY PORTION LEFT OUT FOR ACCESS TO THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OF RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 FROM THE POINT WHERE THE COMMON PASSAGE REACHES THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY IN RE.SY-33/21 |
| EXHIBIT P11 | PHOTOGRAPH OF THE WIDENED PATHWAY, AFTER DEMOLITION OF PETITIONERS STAIRCASE AND HALF WALL AND ANNEXING 1.30 METRES FORM HIS PROPERTY TO THE PATHWAY |
| EXHIBIT P11(a) | PHOTOGRAPH OF THE WIDENED PATHWAY, AFTER DEMOLITION OF PETITIONERS STAIRCASE AND HALF WALL AND ANNEXING 1.30 METRES FORM HIS PROPERTY TO THE PATHWAY |
| EXHIBIT P11(b) | PHOTOGRAPH OF THE WIDENED PATHWAY, AFTER DEMOLITION OF PETITIONERS STAIRCASE AND HALF WALL AND ANNEXING 1.30 METRES FORM HIS PROPERTY TO THE PATHWAY |
| EXHIBIT P12 | PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PETITIONERS PROPERTY IN RE.33/5 SHOWING THE NEW CONSTRUCTION AND THE OLD RESIDENTIAL BUILDING EXISTING THEREIN |
| EXHIBIT P12(a) | PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PETITIONERS PROPERTY IN RE.33/5 SHOWING THE NEW CONSTRUCTION AND THE OLD RESIDENTIAL BUILDING EXISTING THEREIN |
| EXHIBIT P13 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 12.4.2019 SUBMITTED BY RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 BEFORE THE MAVELIKKARA MUNICIAPALITY |
| EXHIBIT P14 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF PETITION DATED 17/4/2019 SUBMITTED BY RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 |
| EXHIBIT P15 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 13.4.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT, WITH RECEIPT |
| EXHIBIT P16 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 27.4.2019 |
WP(C).No.17102 of 2019
7
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT, TOGETHER WITH RECEIPT
EXHIBIT P17 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 21/5/2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT, EXHIBIT P17(a) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 21/5/2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT,
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
TRUE COPY
P.A TO JUDGE
LSN
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ of mandamus is maintainable directing police to provide protection in a civil dispute.
Whether police protection can be granted when a civil dispute exists between parties.
P.C. Krishna Pillai
The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Station House Officer
C. Ramesan Pillai
C. Muraliedharan Pillai
K. Sreekala
C.K. Abdul Rehim
R. Narayana Pisharadi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
