1
CMR, J.
W.P.No.11503 of 2022
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Writ Petition No.11503 of 2022
ORDER:
This Writ Petition for a mandamus is filed to declare the action of respondents 2 and 3 police officials in not providing police aid to the petitioner to enforce the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.758 of 2016 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu, as illegal and consequently, sought direction as this Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 to 3.
3. Despite service of notice on 4th respondent, none appeared on his behalf.
4. The petitioner is the son of one D.Muni Reddy. Earlier, the paternal grandfather of the petitioner by name D.Nagamuni Reddy and the father of the petitioner by name D.Muni Reddy have filed suit in O.S.No.758 of 2016 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu, against the 4th respondent herein for permanent injunction restraining him from interfering with the Rastha being used by the family members of the petitioner from times immemorial situate on the eastern side of the land of the 4th respondent bearing Survey No.216-3A2. The 4th respondent remained ex parte in the said Suit. He did not 2 CMR, J.
W.P.No.11503 of 2022 contest the said Suit. Therefore, the said Suit was decreed on 23.01.2017. Thus, it is evident that a permanent injunction decree was passed against the 4th respondent in O.S.No.758 of 2016 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu, whereby he was restrained from interfering with the usage of the Rastha by the petitioner and his family members, which is the subject matter of the said Suit. Thereafter, the father of the petitioner, who is 2nd plaintiff in the said Suit, died.
5. Earlier, when the 4th respondent interfered with the right of the petitioner in using the said Rastha, a report was lodged with the police and a case in Crime No.34 of 2022 was registered against him in Bukkarayasamudram Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 506 r/w.34 of IPC.
6. Now, it is the grievance of the writ petitioner that in spite of the fact that a permanent injunction decree was passed against him and the aforesaid crime was registered against him that the 4th respondent has been still interfering with his right in respect of using the said Rastha, which is the subject matter of the Suit in O.S.No.758 of 2016 and the decree passed therein. Therefore, it is stated that the petitioner sought police aid from the respondents 2 and 3 to enforce the said permanent injunction decree passed by a competent civil Court and that they are not providing any police aid. Therefore, the petitioner sought for declaration as stated supra.
3
CMR, J.
W.P.No.11503 of 2022
7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, would submit that as the dispute pertains to decree that was passed by the civil Court that the petitioner was earlier advised to obtain an order from the competent Court to provide police aid. So, he would submit that if the competent Court directs the police to provide police aid for enforcement of the decree that the police are ready to provide police aid.
8. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to provide adequate police aid to the petitioner for effective implementation of the decree that was passed in O.S.No.758 of 2016 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anantarapuramu. No costs.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
________________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Date:04.07.2022.
cs