Sofiya A.M vs The District Police Chief

Kerala High Court

Sofiya A.M vs The District Police Chief on 23 May, 2024

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
          THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
                         WP(C) NO. 14340 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

              SOFIYA A.M., AGED 59 YEARS
              D/O. AMINA, MIDHILA HOUSE, SOUTH KODIYATHUR, KODIYATHUR
              P.O., KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673602
              BY ADVS.
              MATHEW KURIAKOSE
              K.R.ARUN
              T.G.SUNIL (PERUMBAVOOR)
              J.KRISHNAKUMAR (ADOOR)
              C.N.PRAKASH
              MONI GEORGE
              SHAJI P.K.


RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, , KOZHIKODE, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT
              POLICE CHIEF, KOZHIKODE., PIN - 673004
     2        THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
              MUKKOM POLICE STATION, MUKKAM, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673602
     3        RASAK, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O. KADIRI, ELANGAL HOUSE,
              KODIYATHUR P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673602
     4        SABIRA, AGED 46 YEARS, D/O. ALAVI, ELANGAL HOUSE,
              KODIYATHUR P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673602
     5        SHABEEB, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O. RASAK, ELANGAL HOUSE,
              KODIYATHUR P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673602
     6        ALIUBAIRAN, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O. RASAK, ELANGAL HOUSE,
              KODIYATHUR P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673602
     7        SHERLI B., AGED 44 YEARS
              W/O. LATE SHAJI SREEDHAR, SREEPADMA, TACHAMPUYIL P.O.,
              KEDAVUR, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673573
              M.B.SHYNI
              RAJESH KUMAR R.(K/112/2013)
              V.R.ANILKUMAR(K/001161/2020)
              SARAFUDHEEN T.(K/801/2022)
 WP(C) NO. 14340 OF 2024
                                       2


                ELDHOSE JOY(K/172/2022)
                AJITH P.C.(K/3643/2023)
                SMT.REKHA C.NAIR, SENIOR G.P.,
                SRI.JAYAKRISHNAN, FOR R3



        THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 14340 OF 2024
                                         3


                                   JUDGMENT

The petitioner alleges that respondents 3 to 6 are obstructing her possession and ownership of an extent of land, over which she has unimpeached right and ownership.

2. Sri.Mathew Kuriakose - learned counsel for the petitioner, explained that the property originally belonged to the fourth respondent, who had obtained a loan from his client and that when it remained unpaid, she filed a Suit and obtained a decree charged to it. He says that the property was thereupon sold in court auction and purchased by the auction purchaser, who is the husband of the 7th respondent; but that since he died in between, the delivery of the same was ordered in favour of the said respondent and his other legal heirs. He pointed out to Ext.P6 Delivery Report and Ext.P7 Delivery Account in substantiation and added that, even though an application to set aside the sale was filed by the original owners, the same was dismissed and therefore, that her ownership over the property has now become absolute.

3. Sri.Mathew Kuriakose further submitted that, however, on 05.02.2024, respondents 3 to 6 destroyed the fencing of the property and committed waste thereon and that their attempt is to now oust his client therefrom, using force and making threats WP(C) NO. 14340 OF 2024 4 and intimidation to her. He submitted that, therefore, his client had no other option but to prefer Ext.P12 before the Police seeking protection, particularly because the 6 th respondent is an accused in several cases, being capable of any violent act, thus imperiling even the life of his client on a constant basis. He concluded saying that, even as of now, though the original owners of the property say that they have moved an application to have the sale set aside, the same has not been ordered, nor have they obtained any directions from the Civil Court; and therefore that their actions are in violation of law and need to be now arrested and checked. He, therefore, prayed that the reliefs sought for in this writ petition be granted.

4. Sri.U.Jayakrishnan - learned counsel for the 3 rd respondent, submitted that the afore assertions of the petitioner are not correct and that his client has already moved the Civil Court to have the sale set aside and the property restored to him. He added that, in the meanwhile, the petitioner is now trying to take forcible possession of the property with the help of Police, misusing the jurisdiction of this Court; and therefore, that this writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Sri.M.B.Shyni - learned counsel for the 4 th respondent, also adopted the afore submissions and argued that since the WP(C) NO. 14340 OF 2024 5 title over the property has not yet been obtained conclusive resolution, this writ petition is not maintainable.

6. Smt.Rekha C.Nair - learned Senior Government Pleader, in response, submitted that the Police have already taken cognizance of Ext.12 complaint of the petitioner and have ensured that her life is adequately protected. She submitted that, however, the civil disputes between the parties are not ones into which the Police can intervene and therefore, that they will not do so. She concluded saying that the official Authorities are willing to abide by any directions to be issued by this Court.

7. I have considered the afore submissions on the touchstone of the various materials on record.

8. Prima facie, it appears that the petitioner is claiming title over the property on the strength of Ext.P1 and Ext.P10 extract of the Basic Tax Receipt. In fact, the party respondents also do not have a case that the property had not been sold by court, or that the petitioner had purchased it subsequently from the 7th respondent and other legal heirs of the original auction purchaser. Their only case is that they have moved application to have the sale set aside, but concede unequivocally that they have not been able to obtain any orders as of now. WP(C) NO. 14340 OF 2024 6

9. Obviously, in the present scenario, the party respondents cannot take law into their own hands, or commit any action which is in violation of law, particularly when the petitioner relies upon proceedings of court and orders in substantiation of her claim.

10. In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition and direct the 2nd respondent to act on the complaint of the petitioner, namely Ext.P12 and ensure that her life and property are adequately protected from every threat, including from the party respondents or any other person. They shall also ensure that law and order is always maintained and that none of the parties are allowed to take law into their own hands.

That said, however, as far as respondents 3 to 6 are concerned, any remedy they have against the petitioner, or the property, are left open and they will be at liberty to pursue the same, untrammeled by the observations herein, before any alternative forum/court.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 14340 OF 2024 7 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14340/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P 1 TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 05.12.2013 WITH MEDIATION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT DATED 20.11.2012 IN O.S. NO. 587/2012 ON THE FILES OF THE 2ND ADDL. SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE Exhibit P 2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 05.12.2013 IN O.S. NO. 587/2012 ON THE FILES OF THE 2ND ADDL. SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE Exhibit P 3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.03.2017 IN E.A. NO.

37/2017 IN E.P. NO. 416/2014 IN O.S. NO. 587/2012 ON THE FILES OF THE 2ND ADDL. SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE Exhibit P 4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 04.08.2022 IN F.A.O. NO. 194/2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT Exhibit P 5 TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS OF M.J.C. NO. 4/2024 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT Exhibit P 6 TRUE COPY OF THE DELIVERY REPORT IN E.A. NO 225/2018 & E.A. NO 226/2018 IN E.P. NO. 416/2014 IN O.S. NO. 587/2012 ON THE FILES OF THE 2ND ADDL. SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE Exhibit P 7 TRUE COPY OF THE DELIVERY ACCOUNT IN E.A. NO 225/2018 & E.A. NO 226/2018 IN E.P. NO. 416/2014 IN O.S. NO. 587/2012 ON THE FILES OF THE 2ND ADDL. SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE Exhibit P 8 TRUE COPY OF THE THANDAPPER ACCOUNT REGISTER ENTRY NO. 184/2023/21653 DATED 22.11.2023 OF THANDAPPER NO. 4677 OF KODIYATHUR VILLAGE Exhibit P 9 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE SALE DEED NO, 260/2024 OF S.R.O. MUKKOM Exhibit P 10 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 13.02.2024 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICE KODIYATHUR TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P 11 TRUE COPY OF THE SURVEY MAP OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY IN KODIYATHUR VILLAGE Exhibit P 12 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 05.02.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND WP(C) NO. 14340 OF 2024 8 RESPONDENT AND ITS ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT DATED 06.02.2024 Exhibit P 13 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND F.I. STATEMENT IN CRIME NO. 111/2024 OF MUKKOM POLICE STATION Exhibit P 14 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY KOZHIKODE EDITION ON 23.02.2023 REGARDING THE ARREST OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P 15 TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS AND PLAINT IN O.S. NO.

71/2024 ON THE FILES OF THE SUBORDINATE JUDGES COURT KOZHIKODE