Varghese S/O Pailee vs The Circle Inspector Of Police
2021 Latest Caselaw 19539 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943
                          WP(C) NO. 17571 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:

     1     VARGHESE, S/O PAILEE, AGED 70 YEARS,PADAYATTY HOUSE,
           MUDAKKUZHA, VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
           ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 546.

     2     ELIYAMMA, AGED 66 YEARS, W/O VARGHESE, PADAYATTY HOUSE,
           MUDAKKUZHA, VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
           ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 546.

           BY ADV JOHN JOSEPH(ROY)


RESPONDENTS:

     1     THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KODANADU POLICE STATION,
           KODANAD P. O., KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
           PIN - 683 544.

     2     THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KODANADU POLICE STATION,
           KODANAD P. O., KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
           PIN - 683 544.

     3     P. P. KURIAKOSE, S/O PAILEE, PADAYATTY HOUSE, MUDAKKUZHA,
           VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM
           DISTRICT, PIN - 683 546.

     4     P. P. PAULOSE, S/O PAILEE, PADAYATTY HOUSE, MUDAKKUZHA,
           VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM
           DISTRICT, PIN - 683 546.

     5     MARY PAULOSE, W/O P. P. POULOSE, PADAYATTY HOUSE,
           MUDAKKUZHA, VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
           ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 546.

     6     P. T. GEORGE, S/O THOMAS, PARVELIKUDY HOUSE, MUDAKKUZHA,
           VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM
           DISTRICT, PIN - 683 546.
 WPC 17571/21
                                        2



             BY ADVS.
             K.M.FIROZ
             DIPU JAMES
             M.SHAJNA
             SRI.E.C.BINEESH - GP




      THIS     WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION      ON   17.09.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC 17571/21
                                               3



                               JUDGMENT

The petitioners seek that respondents 1 and 2

to be directed to afford adequate protection to

their lives and their property covered by Exts.P2

and P3 judgments. They say that even though

respondents 3 to 6 have no right over the

aforementioned property, they are causing illegal

obstruction in their enjoyment of the same; thus

constraining them to have approached the 2nd

respondent - Station House Officer through Ext.P7

seeking protection. They allege that, since no

action has been taken by the said respondent, they

have been forced to approach this Court through

this Writ Petition.

2. The afore submissions made by Sri.John

Joseph - learned counsel for the petitioners, were

vehemently refuted by Sri.K.M.Firoze - learned

counsel for the 3rd respondent and by Sri.Dipu

James - learned counsel for respondents 4 to 6, WPC 17571/21

asserting that the allegations of the petitioners

are wholly untrue and that they cannot claim any

exclusive right over the property in question.

They submitted that if the petitioners require any

such declaration, they ought to have approached

the competent Civil Court, but that without doing

so, they have approached this Court through this

Writ Petition; and further allege that their

intention is to use the judgment and orders of

this Court as a method of enforcing their civil

rights over the property. They, therefore, prayed

that this Writ Petition be dismissed.

3. Sri.K.M.Firoze, in addition to the afore,

submitted that the property in question lies as a

pathway and that the petitioners are, in fact, now

obstructing his client's right to use it,

including for movement of his vehicle and thus

reiteratingly prayed that this Court not grant

them any reliefs. He, however, made it clear that

his client or respondents 4 to 6 have not and do WPC 17571/21

not intend to cause the petitioners any

intimidation or threat and contended that all such

allegations have been made only for the purpose of

this case.

4. The learned Government Pleader -

Sri.E.C.Bineesh, also affirmed that the disputes

between the parties, with respect to the property

in question, are squarely in the realm of civil

law and that the Police cannot interfere into the

same. He submitted that, however, the competent

police officers are keeping vigil over the area in

question to ensure that law and order is

maintained and that there is no breach of peace by

anyone.

5. In reply, Sri.John Joseph - learned

counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the

submissions made on behalf of respondents 3 to 6

may not be accepted by this Court because the

rights over the property have already been

concluded by the competent Courts through Exts.P2 WPC 17571/21

and P3 judgments. He submitted that, therefore,

his clients are fully entitled to use the property

in the manner they are eligible to and that the

party respondents cannot stand in such way. He,

therefore, again prayed that this Writ Petition be

allowed granting the reliefs as prayed for by his

clients.

6. When I evaluate the afore submissions, I

notice that the petitioners claim right over the

property in question on the basis of Exts.P2 and

P3; while the 3rd respondent specifically contends

that he is not a party to the same. Even if this

is so, I fail to understand how the 3 rd respondent

or any other party respondents, can enforce any

right over the property using force or other

confutative methods. In fact, the assertion of

respondents 3 to 6 is that they are not doing so

and that they intend to invoke their legal

remedies to enforce their rights over the property

in question.

WPC 17571/21

7. That said, since the petitioners are

relying upon Exts.P2 and P3 judgments, which show

that respondents 3 to 6 had filed a suit against

them, but had been unsuccessful in staking claim

over the property, it is without doubt that the

said respondents cannot cause any hindrance to the

use of property by the petitioners in any manner

whatsoever, except if they are able to obtain

necessary orders from a competent Court.

In the afore circumstances, I order this writ

petition and direct the 2nd respondent to ensure

that the lives of the petitioners and that of the

party respondents are sufficiently and effectively

protected from each other and that none of them

are allowed to take law into their hands. The said

respondent will also ensure that the law and order

in the area is constantly maintained and that no

breach of peace is permitted by any person,

including respondents 3 to 6.

Needless to say, I leave full liberty to the WPC 17571/21

petitioners and to respondents 3 to 6 to seek to

enforce their rights over the property, as they

may be entitled to, solely through the processes

of law, but without illegally obstructing the

petitioners using force or in any manner in

future.

Sd/-

RR                                        DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
                                                JUDGE
 WPC 17571/21


               APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17571/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1            TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT O.S.NO.174/2013

OF THE MUNSIFFS COURT, PERUMBAVOOR FILED BY R-5 AND R-6.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTED 16.12.2015 IN O.S.NO.174/2013 OF THE MUNSIFFS COURT, PERUMBAVOOR FILED BY R- 5 AND R-6.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 16.12.2015 IN O.S.NO.174/2013 OF THE MUNSIFFS COURT, PERUMBAVOOR FILED BY R- 5 AND R-6.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 30.07.2021 IN RESPECT OF THE ENTIRE PROPERTY OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 20.07.2021 BY 1ST PETITIONER.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT ON ACKNOWLEDGING EXHIBIT P5 ON 20.07.2021.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 16.08.2021 BY 1ST PETITIONER.

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT ON ACKNOWLEDGING EXHIBIT P7 ON 16.08.2021.