Dominic.N.A vs The Superintendent Of Police ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6820 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
     TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 24TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                         WP(C) NO.17650 OF 2022
PETITIONER :-

           DOMINIC.N.A., AGED 46 YEARS
           S/O.LATE ANTONY, NELLICKAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
           KOCHALMADAPPATTU ROAD, MANJUMMEL,
           ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683 501

             BY ADVS.
             P.P.BIJU
             S.R.SREEJITH


RESPONDENTS :-

      1      THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (ERNAKULAM RURAL)
             OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
             ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 101

      2      THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
             KALADY POLICE STATION, KALADY,
             ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 574

      3      VINCENT
             CHINJU CATERING, CHERANELLOOR,
             ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 544

             BY ADV P.THOMAS GEEVERGHESE
             BY SRI.T.K.SHAJAHAN, SR.GP


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   14.06.2022,   THE    COURT    ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO.17650 OF 2022

                                 -: 2 :-


                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 14th day of June, 2022

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-

"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or such writ, order or direction commanding the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to provide effective and adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioner and his employees.

(ii) To declare that the 3rd respondent and his men have absolutely no manner of right to obstruct the petitioner from removing pandal materials from the St.Thomas Church Premises, Malayattoor."

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned

Government Pleader as well as the learned counsel appearing for

the 3rd respondent.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner

that the petitioner is running an event management business and

that he had set up a pandal in the premises of the St.Thomas

Church, Malayattoor. It is submitted that when the petitioner went

to remove the pandal from the premises, the 3 rd respondent and his

men are restraining the petitioner and obstructing the removal of

the pandal. It is stated that they had also taken possession of a

vehicle bearing registration No.KL-07-BY-3231 which belongs to

the petitioner. Though Exts.P1 and P2 complaints were preferred

before respondents 1 and 2, no action has been taken thereon.

4. The learned Government Pleader submits, on WP(C) NO.17650 OF 2022

instructions, that no copies of any complaints submitted by the

petitioner had been received either by the 1 st or the 2nd respondent

and that the matter has not gained the attention of the

respondents. It is submitted that there is no receipt for any

complaint produced in the writ petition also.

5. The 3rd respondent has placed a counter affidavit on

record. It is stated that the 3 rd respondent had conducted catering

service in connection with the petitioner's wife's sister's wedding

about two years back and the petitioner owes an amount of

Rs.1,39,000/- to the 3rd respondent. It is submitted that the

petitioner had handed over possession of a mini goods vehicle

bearing registration No.KL-07-BY-3231 to the 3 rd respondent for

using for six months in discharge of the debt. It is stated that the

said vehicle had thereafter been taken away by the petitioner and

the 3rd respondent found it lying at Malayattoor Church, used to

unload the petitioner's pandal materials. It is stated that the 3 rd

respondent had complained to the police and with the help of the

police, the vehicle was secured. It is submitted that the 3 rd

respondent has no intention to obstruct the petitioner from

removing of his pandal materials and that he had tried only to

secure the vehicle which was pawned to him.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there WP(C) NO.17650 OF 2022

are no documents whatsoever produced by the 3rd respondent in

support of his contention that the vehicle had been pawned to the

3rd respondent or that there was any complaint raised before the

police.

7. I notice that the contention between the parties is in the

nature of a monetary dispute and that the police cannot be

involved in the same. It is also submitted by the learned

Government Pleader, on instructions, that Exts.P1 and P2

complaints have not been received by respondents 1 and 2.

In the above view of the matter, I am of the opinion that

the prayers as sought for cannot be granted. In case the parties

have any dispute, it is for them to resolve the same in accordance

with law. If the petitioner has any complaint with regard to

removal of his pandal materials, it is for the petitioner to raise such

complaints before the Station House Officer, which shall be dealt

with in accordance with law.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

Jvt/14.6.2022 WP(C) NO.17650 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17650/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY THE COMPLAINT DATED 29.05.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT THROUGH EMAIL

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY THE COMPLAINT DATED 29.05.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT THROUGH EMAIL