Shanty Noony vs Director General Of Police
2023 Latest Caselaw 2841 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1944
                  WP(C) NO. 3682 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
          SHANTY NOONY
          AGED 50 YEARS
          W/O. NOONY JOSEPH,
          THOPPIL HOUSE,
          NEAR ABHILASH CORNER,
          PUTHURKKARA,
          THRISSUR, P.O.
          AYYANTHOLE, PIN - 680003

         BY ADVS.
         A.PARVATHI MENON
         P.SANJAY
         BIJU MEENATTOOR
         PAUL VARGHESE (PALLATH)
         P.A.MOHAMMED ASLAM
         PRASOON SUNNY
         KIRAN NARAYANAN
         RAHUL RAJ P.
         AMRUTHA M. NAIR


RESPONDENTS:
    1     DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
          LAW AND ORDER THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010
    2     DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
          THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680631
    3     SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
          THRISSUR WEST POLICE STATION, PIN - 680003
    4     NOBY THOMAS JOSEPH
          AGED 54 YEARS
          S/O. LATE A. JOSEPH,
          PERMANENT RESIDENT OF THOPPIL HOUSE,
          NEAR ABHILASH CORNER,
          PUTHURKKARA, AYYANTHOLE P.O.,
          THRISSUR, PIN - 680003
          BY ADVS.
          K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN
          DEEPA K.RADHAKRISHNAN(K/001131/2010)
          JISSMON A KURIAKOSE(K/136/2020)
          SANAL C.S(K/1555/2020)
          E.C.BINEESH GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS WRIT PETITION     (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP         FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.03.2023,    THE COURT ON THE SAME          DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.3682 of 2023
                                :2 :




                        JUDGMENT

Dated this the 1st day of March, 2023

The petitioner states that she is the widow of the

deceased brother of the 4th respondent, but the 4 th respondent

is harassing the petitioner and threatening her. Though the

petitioner preferred complaints before respondents 1 to 3, no

action has been taken.

2. The petitioner states that she is residing in a

property which is an ancestor property. This being a common

property, it is subject to partition. The petitioner has a right to

hold the property.

3. The 4th respondent contends that his mother

executed a document on the basis of which the 4 th respondent

got exclusive right over the property in which the petitioner is WP(C) No.3682 of 2023

residing.

4. It has come out from the pleadings that the

husband of the petitioner had filed O.S. No.1126/2014 seeking

partition of the family property. The said suit stands

dismissed. According to the petitioner, an appeal has been

preferred against the judgment in O.S. No.1126/2014 which is

numbered as A.S. No.7/2019 and the appeal is pending

before the District Court, Thrissur. The 4 th respondent and his

wife filed O.S. No.3873/2010 for recovery of possession,

mandatory injunctions, damages for unauthorised use and

occupation against the 4th respondent. The said suit has been

decreed in favour of the 4 th respondent against which the

petitioner has preferred an appeal as A.S. No.155/2018, which

is also pending consideration before the District Court,

Thrissur.

5. The counsel for the 4th respondent would submit

that the petitioner has already lost the litigations and the

appeals are pending before the District Court, Thrissur. The

4th respondent submitted that he has not physically threatened WP(C) No.3682 of 2023

or assaulted the petitioner and does not intend to cause any

threat to the petitioner.

6. The Government Pleader submits that in

connection with the dispute between the petitioner and the 4 th

respondent, two incidents were reported and the police

interfered in the matter effectively. At present, there is no law

and order situation. If any complaint is received by the police

authorities, the same will be looked into and appropriate

action will be taken.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1

to 3 and the learned counsel for the 4 th respondent.

8. It is evident that the dispute emanates from a claim

to hold property which is now in possession of the petitioner.

Civil litigations are pending. The matter is before the District

Court, Thrissur. The petitioner as well as the 4 th respondent

are actively contesting the appeals. The 4 th respondent

submits that he has no intention to cause any threat or forceful

obstruction to the petitioner.

WP(C) No.3682 of 2023

In the circumstances of the case, the writ petition is

disposed of directing the 3rd respondent-Sub Inspector of

Police that if any complaint is received from the petitioner

regarding physical threat or obstruction, appropriate action

shall be taken in accordance with law.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE sss WP(C) No.3682 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3682/2023

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID JUDGMENT IN OP(C) 111/2020 DATED 15.01.2020.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 25.01.2023. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT DATED 25-01-2023.