Feroz E.T vs Sulaiman Karadan
2021 Latest Caselaw 3454 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

           MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 12TH MAGHA,1942

                         WP(C).No.28960 OF 2019(T)

PETITIONER/S:

                FEROZ E.T.,
                AGED 49 YEARS,
                S/O E.T.MUHAMMED BASHEER, 2/1788 A,
                KALATHIL AVENUE, FLORIKKAN ROAD,
                CIVIL STATION.P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
                PIN-673020.

                BY ADVS.SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
                SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV
                SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR


RESPONDENT/S:

       1        SULAIMAN KARADAN,
                MALABAR FLAT, NEAR SALES TAX OFFICE,
                KOTTARAM ROAD, NADAKKAV,
                KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673006.

       2        MUHAMMED SHAFARAD,
                S/O SULAIMAN KARADAN, MALABAR FLAT,
                NEAR SALES TAX OFFICE,
                KOTTARAM ROAD, NADAKKAV,
                KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673006.

       3        THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
                CHEVAYUR POLICE STATION,
                KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673012.

       4        THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER,
                OFFICE OF THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER,
                PALAYAM, KOZHIKODE-673004.

       5        THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
                PAVAMANI RD, TAZHEKKOD,
                KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673004.

                R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW
                R3 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI P P THAJUDEEN



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01.02.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.28960 OF 2019              2




                                JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for issuance of

directions to the respondents 3 to 5 to render effective protection to the

life and property of the petitioner and his family members from any

threats or physical harm from the party respondents.

2. The petitioner states that he is the Managing Director of

Annam Steels Pvt. Ltd., a Company incorporated in the year 2000 with

its registered office at Chennai. In the year 2013, Annam Steels entered

into an agreement to purchase a defunct Iron Ore Company owned by

Kudremukh Iron Ore Company Ltd. According to the petitioner, the

Company was financed by a consortium of Nationalised Banks. For the

purpose of securing financial assistance to facilitate the purchase, the

Company approached the 1st respondent as well. Hoping to secure

good dividends, the party respondents readily handed over their title

deeds to be placed as collaterals for securing loans. The purchase did

not take off as originally envisaged. The Company met with huge loss

and recovery proceedings were initiated against the company and its

guarantors by the banks.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he has no personal

liability but nevertheless he undertook to repay the amounts. The

petitioner contends that the consortium of banks have now come up

with a One Time Settlement Scheme and all efforts are being made to

settle the entire dues.

4. The petitioner states that the respondents 1 and 2 who had

lost money in the business transaction are nursing ill will towards the

petitioner. He contends that on 12.5.2019, while his wife and minor

daughter were at home, the party respondents trespassed into the

compound of the house and raised threats. He lodged a complaint

before the police but no action was taken. He states that on 10.6.2019,

the party respondents repeated the above act. They attempted to

trespass into the house and had also threatened and abused the son of

the petitioner. They lodged Ext.P2 complaint before the police.

However, they did not offer any assistance. It is in the afore

circumstances that the petitioner is before this Court seeking direction

to the respondents to afford protection for life and property to him and

his family members.

5. A counter affidavit has been filed by respondent Nos.1 and

2, wherein they assert that the petitioner had secured their title deeds

and obtained money by mortgaging the properties. The amount was

siphoned off and the party respondents were thereby cheated. When

the party respondents approached the petitioner and demanded back

the amounts legally due, the petitioner has lodged frivolous complaints

before the police. According to the respondents, they have no intention

to cause any harm to the petitioner or his family members. Their only

request is that necessary directions be issued to the petitioner to repay

the amount legally due to them.

6. A statement has been filed by the learned Government

Pleader for and on behalf of the 3rd respondent. In the said statement,

it is stated that on receipt of the complaint filed by the petitioner herein,

the petitioner and the 1st respondent were summoned to the Police

Station on 21.09.2020 and their statements were recorded. It is further

stated that the 1st respondent has not initiated any proceeding to

realize the amount due from the petitioner.

7. After hearing the submissions of the petitioner as well as

the party respondents, this Court by order dated 06.01.2021, had

relegated the parties to mediation. However, it appears that the efforts

to settle the matter out of court or by recourse to mediation has not

yielded any result.

8. Sri.Adithya Rajeev, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner submits that even during the pendency of mediation, the

party respondents have trespassed into the residential property of the

petitioner and had raised threats. He has lodged Ext.P7 complaint

before the police.

9. I have heard the submissions of Sri.Prajeesh, the learned

counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2, and the learned

Government Pleader.

10. It is not in dispute that the respondents 1 and 2 have

invested money in Annam Steels. However, the fact remains that the

party respondents have not initiated any proceeding before any

authority with a prayer to realize the amount due to them. Though it is

contended that the petitioner has cheated the party respondents, no

complaint whatsoever has been lodged before the police. In that view

of the matter, there is no justification on the part of the party

respondents in trespassing into the home or office of the petitioner or in

intimidating the petitioner or his family members.

Resultantly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the

respondents 3 to 5 to ensure that no harm is caused to the petitioner or

his family members by the party respondents. The party respondents

shall also refrain from making any threats of physical harm. If any

complaint is received by the police of violation of any of the above

directions, the police shall inquire into the same and if the same is found

to be genuine, shall initiate appropriate action against the perpetrators

in accordance with law.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

JUDGE DSV

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 13.05.2019 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 10.06.2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT DATED 10.06.2019 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT DATED 28.06.2019 IN CRIME NO.594 OF 2019 OF THE NADAKKAV POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE.

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION OF ANNAM STEEL PVT LTD ALONG WITH TYPED COPY.

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN SANCTION LETTER ISSUED BY PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK DATED 26.3.2013

EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 30.01.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT DATED 31.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:    NIL



                                  //TRUE COPY//    P.A.TO JUDGE