Kerala High Court
Rajamma vs Station House Officer on 9 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 7266 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 RAJAMMA,
W/O. THANKAPPAN, CHAKKALACKAL HOUSE, MULAVUKADU P.O.
ERNKAULAM -682 031.
2 SOBHA PRATHAPAN,
W/O. PRATHAPAN, SOBHALAYAM, PANDIPPILLY, PADAM ROAD,
ELAMAKKARA P.O. ERNAKULAM 682 026.
BY ADVS.
G.HARIHARAN
SRI.PRAVEEN.H.
SMT.K.S.SMITHA,
SMT.SMITHA PRAVEEN
SRI.V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
MULAVUKADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM 682 031.
2 CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER,
CITY POLICE COMMISSIONERATE, REVENUE TOWERS, BOAT JETTY,
ERNAKULAM 682 011.
3 THE TAHSILDAR (SURVEY),
KANNAYANUR TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM 682 011.
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
MULAVUKADU VILLAGE, MULAVAKADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682 031.
5 MR.P.N. RAVEENDRAN,
S/O.NARAYANAN, PALLATHUPARAMBU HOUSE, PONJIKKARA DESOM,
MULAVUKADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT BLAVATH,
NJARAKKAL, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682 505.
6 Mr.Anil Kumar
S/o Shanmukhan, Blavath,
2
W.P.(C)No. 7266 of 2021
Njarakkal, Eranakulam District-682505
BY ADV SRI.P.R.MILTON
SRI.E C.BINEESH - GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
W.P.(C)No. 7266 of 2021
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 9th day of November, 2021.
The petitioners allege that they have been obstructed
by respondents 5 and 6 from entering into the property,
over which their rights have been declared by a competent
Court and put into their possession. They say that even
though respondents 5 and 6 obtain no right to indulge in
such illegal activities, the 6th respondent, who is the son-in-
law of the 5th respondent, is meting out threats and
intimidation to them and is refusing to even allow them to
enter into the property.
2. The petitioners explain that their intent is to stay
in one of the buildings in the said property, but that their
desire has been frustrated on account of the threats meted
W.P.(C)No. 7266 of 2021
out by respondents 5 and 6. They say that, therefore,
they preferred Ext.P7 before the 1st respondent - Station
House Officer seeking protection; but that since no action
has been taken thereon, they have been constrained to
approach this Court through this writ petition.
3. The afore submissions made by Sri.G.Hariharan
- learned counsel for the petitioner, were strongly opposed
by Sri.P.R.Milton - learned counsel appearing for
respondents 5 and 6, saying that, contrary to the
assertions of the petitioners, the rights over the property
have not been finalized yet, since proceedings are still
pending before the competent Court. He, however,
conceded that the property in question was delivered to
the petitioners through a Court Amin; and added that
neither of his clients have obstructed them from entering
into the same, nor have they meted out any threat or
W.P.(C)No. 7266 of 2021
intimidation, as has been alleged. He asserted that the
attempt of the petitioners is to obtain orders from this
Court and obtain ownership over the properties, over
which litigations are still pending. He, therefore, prayed
that this writ petition be dismissed.
4. Sri.E.C.Bineesh - learned Government Pleader,
submitted that since the disputes between the parties are
in the realm of civil law, the police have not intervened into
the same. He, however, submitted that if this Court is so
inclined, the competent police Authorities are willing to
protect the lives of the petitioners, as may be required.
5. In reply, Sri.G.Hariharan - learned counsel for
the petitioners, pointed out that, as is discernible from
Ext.P8, the jurisdictional Revenue Divisional Officer has
already addressed the 1st respondent - Station House
Officer to afford protection to the petitioners to enter into
W.P.(C)No. 7266 of 2021
the property in question. He submitted that it is because
no action was taken thereon, that his client has had to
approach the 1st respondent - Station House Officer
directly and then to come before this Court.
6. When I consider the afore submissions, there
can be little doubt, it being admitted, that the property in
question has been delivered to the petitioners by a
competent Civil Court. Whether the said process has now
attained finality or whether appeals and such proceedings
are pending against it, are of little relevance to this Court,
while it acts under the jurisdiction which is now commonly
called as "police protection" jurisdiction. It is needless to
say that this Court is only enjoined to ensure that the lives
of the petitioners are properly protected from any threat or
intimidation from any person, under the constitutional
imperatives.
W.P.(C)No. 7266 of 2021
7. That so said, since respondents 5 and 6
vehemently say that they have no intention to cause any
physical obstruction to the petitioners nor have they meted
out threats or intimidation to them, I deem it necessary to
grant relief to the petitioners, particularly taking note of
Ext.P8 proceedings of the RDO.
In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition
to the limited extent of directing the 1st respondent -
Station House Officer, to afford adequate and effective
protection to petitioners to enter into and enjoy the
property in question, subject to further orders, decrees or
judgments to be issued by the competent Civil Court in
future.
As far as respondents 5 and 6 are concerned, they are
left at full liberty to invoke and pursue all their remedies
against the property in question, as they are advised; but
W.P.(C)No. 7266 of 2021
shall not take law into their own hands nor cause any
physical obstruction to the petitioners in enjoying the
property.
Needless to say, the 1st respondent will ensure that
law and order is maintained in the area where the property
in question is situated, without any breach being allowed
by respondents 5 and 6 or their men or associates.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
Raj/09.11.2021.
W.P.(C)No. 7266 of 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7266/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT MADE IN RFA
NO.565/2010 ON DATED 09.11.2017.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.02.2018
ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE SUB COURT,
ERNAKULAM IN CONNECTION WITH I.A. NO.
6644/2010 IN O.S.NO.251/2007.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER MADE IN SLP
(CIVIL) NO.8779/2018 ON 26.03.2018 BY
THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DELIVERY NOTE EFFECTED
BY THE AMIN DEPUTED BY THE HONBLE SUB
COURT II ERNAKULAM, ON 07.09.2018.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT
ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT IN THE
NAME OF THE PETITIONERS AND ANOTHER ON
18.01.2021.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED
18.01.2021 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT
ALLOTTING SUB DIVISION TO THE
PROPERTIES DELIVERED BY THE AMIN IN THE
NAME OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FLED BY THE
2ND PETITIONER, DATED 06.02.2021 BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
25.09.2020 ADDRESSED TO THE 1ST
W.P.(C)No. 7266 of 2021
RESPONDENT SENT BY THE REVENUE
DIVISIONAL OFFICER (SUB COLLECTOR), FOR
KOCHI.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 21.03.2019
IN CRIME NO. 348/2019 OF MULAVUKAD
POLICE STATION.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
11.02.2021 FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM.
