Kerala High Court
K.Suresh vs State Of Kerala on 7 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 16TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 14027 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
K.SURESH, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. KUMARAN (LATE),
KANNACHI NIVAS, ADICHIRA, KARIPODE VILLAGE,
CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678503.
BY ADVS.
RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY
K.VIJINA
ARUL MURALIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY HOME SECRETARY,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
2 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, PALAKKAD,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001.
3 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
PUDUNAGARAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
PIN - 678503.
4 LEELA , W/O. UUNNAN & D/O. PERUMAL, KARIPPODE THARA,
PUDUNAGARAM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
PIN - 678503.
5 LATHA, GRAND DAUGHTER OF PERUMAL, KARIPPODE THARA,
PUDUNAGARAM VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
PIN - 678503.
BY ADV P.YADHU KUMAR
SRI.E.C.BINEESH - GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).15351/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 14027&15351/21
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 16TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 15351 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 ABDUL JABBAR, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O MUHAMMED
HUSSAIN,
MUTHALANTHODE, VILAYODI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
2 RAMACHANDRAN, S/O LATE VELUKUTTY, AGED 64 YEARS,
DHARMADHA HOUSE, CHOZHIYAKKADU, VANDITHAVALAM,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY
K.VIJINA
ARUL MURALIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY HOME SECRETARY,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, PALAKKAD,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
PALAKKAD, PIN-678001.
3 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE (STATION HOUSE
OFFICER), PUDUNGARAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD
DISTRICT, PIN-678503.
4 LEELA, W/O UUNNAN AND D/O PERUMAL, AGE NOT KNOWN,
KARIPPODE THARA, PUDUNAGARAM VILLAGE,
CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678503.
5 LATHA, GRAND DAUGHTER OF PERUMAL, AGE NOT KNOWN,
KARIPPODE THARA, PUDUNAGARAM VILLAGE, CHITTUR
TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678503.
WPC 14027&15351/21
3
BY ADV P.YADHU KUMAR
SRI.E.C.BINEESH - GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 07.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).14027/2021, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 14027&15351/21
4
JUDGMENT
The petitioners in these two cases - which
have been heard together on account of the
analogous facts and circumstances pleaded and
similarity in the reliefs sought - claim that their
agricultural operations in an extent of property
owned by them in certain survey numbers in
Podunagaram Village of Palakkad District, are being
obstructed by the party respondents herein, without
any justified cause; and therefore, that they were
constrained to approach the 3rd respondent - Sub
Inspector of Police, Podunagaram Police Station,
through a request seeking protection.
2. The petitioners say that since the said
Authority did not act as per their request, they
have been constrained to approach this Court for a
direction to the 3rd respondent to ensure that their
lives and properties are adequately protected from
any threat or intimidation from the party
respondents.
WPC 14027&15351/21
3. I have heard Shri.Rajesh Sivaramankutty,
learned counsel appearing for the petitioners;
Shri.Yadhukumar P., learned counsel appearing for
the party respondents and the learned Government
Pleader, Shri.E.C.Bineesh appearing for the
official respondents.
4. Sri.Yadukumar P. - learned counsel for the
party respondents, submitted that the edifice of
the claims of the petitioners in these Writ
Petitions is on an assertion that they are the
owners of the property in question, but that this
is factually incorrect and contrary to the truth.
He submitted that his clients have sufficient
records to prove that the properties, which the
petitioners are claiming to be their own, do not
belong to them but to his clients and that,
therefore, they have now decided to approach the
competent Civil Court seeking injunction against
them. He then submitted that his clients do not
stand in the way of this Court granting protection
to the lives of the petitioner, but pleaded that
WPC 14027&15351/21
they may not be permitted to undertake agricultural
operations in the properties in question for the
afore reason. He thus prayed that these writ
petitions be ordered only on such terms.
5. The learned Government Pleader -
Sri.E.C.Bineesh, submitted that, on receipt of the
request of the petitioners for protection, the
competent Police Authorities have ensured that
there is no law and order issues in the area in
question and that none of the parties have been
allowed to breach peace in any manner. He submitted
that this vigil will be continued by the concerned
Police authorities in future also.
6. When I consider the afore submissions - in
particular those made by Sri.Yadu Kumar P., learned
counsel for the party respondents - it is clear
that they are impelling certain civil disputes
against the properties in question. They have a
case that they are the owners of the properties and
that the asserted possession over the same by the
petitioners is illegal. In such scenario, their
WPC 14027&15351/21
remedy, certainly, is to approach the competent
Civil Court and obtain necessary orders and cannot,
therefore, take law into their hands or unleash
acts of violence or intimidation on the petitioners
for such purpose.
In the afore circumstances, I order these writ
petitions and direct the 3rd respondent to ensure
that law and order is maintained in the area in
question and that the petitioners or the party
respondents do not commit any acts of violence or
threats against each other with respect to the
property in question.
Needless to say, the contentions of the party
respondents are left open to be pursued by them
appropriately before the Civil Court.
Sd/-
Mc/RR DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
WPC 14027&15351/21
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15351/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
DATED 6/5/2017 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS
BY THE PUDUNAGARAM VILLAGE OFFICE.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE
PETITIONERS DATED 26/7/2021 SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED
27/7/2021 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE
3RD RESPONDENT ON RECEIPT OF EXHIBIT P-
WPC 14027&15351/21
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14027/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
21.12.2013 IN O.S NO.150/2013 PASSED BY
THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHITTUR.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
ISSUED BY THE PUDUNAGARAM VILLAGE OFFICE
DATED 21.06.2021 IN FAVOUR OF
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN
O.S.NO.45/2014 FILED AGAINST THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
CHITTUR.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE
PETITIONER DATED 18.06.2021 SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ISSUED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON RECEIPT OF
EXHIBIT P4.
RESPONDENTS' EXTS:
EXHIBIT R5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED DOCUMENT
NO.20/1992 OF SRO, KODUVAYUR
