Allowed

M.Vijayalakshmi v. The Sub Inspector of Police

Madras HC18 Jun 2019WP/16812/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ to restrain police from interfering in a pending civil suit between her and a respondent. Court directed police not to meddle in the civil dispute, directing parties to resolve rights in the civil court.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent police not to interfere with the civil dispute; parties to agitate rights in the pending civil suit. No costs.

M.Vijayalakshmi Vs The Sub Inspector of Police — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 18.06.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶5

W.P No.16812 of 2019

¶6

M.Vijayalakshmi ... Petitioner vs. 1. The Sub Inspector of Police, Vadakuthu Police Station, Vadakuthu, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Vadakuthu Police Station, Vadakuthu, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District. 3.The Sub Inspector of Police, Neyveli Township Police Station, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District. 4.The Inspector of Police, Neyveli Township Police Station, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District. 5.P.Mazhavarayan ... Respondents

¶7

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 to 4 from harassing/intimidating the petitioner in respect of civil dispute in O.S.No.19 of 2017, on the file of Subordinate Court, Neyveli.

¶8

For Petitioner : M/s.R.Gururaj

¶9

For Respondents: Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

¶10

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This Writ petition has been filed to forbearing the respondent police from interfering with the several dispute pending between the parties in O.S.No.19 of 2017 before the Subordinate Court, Neyveli.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is already a suit that is pending between the parties in O.S.No.19 of 2017, before the Subordinate Court, Neyveli and the counter party namely the 5th respondent has already filed a written statement in the said petition. While so, the 5th respondent is attempting to interfere with the property with the help of police and the police are unnecessarily interfering in a civil dispute.

¶14

Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted that the respondent police will not interfere with the dispute between the parties and the parties can agitate their rights in the pending suit.

¶15

Taking into consideration, the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be a direction to the respondent police not to interfere with the Civil dispute between the petitioner and the 5th respondent and the parties shall agitate their rights only in the pending suit in O.S.No.19 of 2017, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Neyveli.

¶16

This Writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No Costs.

¶17

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶18

//True Copy//

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

ub To

¶21

The Sub Inspector of Police, Vadakuthu Police Station, Vadakuthu, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District.

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶23

2.The Inspector of Police, Vadakuthu Police Station, Vadakuthu, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District. 3.The Sub Inspector of Police, Neyveli Township Police Station, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District. 4.The Inspector of Police, Neyveli Township Police Station, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District. 5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Madras. W.P No.16812 of 2019 gp[co] srg 28/06/2019

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M.Vijayalakshmi v. The Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Vijayalakshmi v. The Sub Inspector 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

Devi, Vs Stae Rep. by Inspector of

P. Krishnaveni, Vs the Superintendent of Police

A.Srinivasan Vs the Superintendent of Police

S.Subramanian Vs The Inspector of Police

D.Dilipkumar Vs the Inspector of Police (L and O)

Raj Kumar Vs Alagusolaimalai