Shyja Jacob vs Girish
2024 Latest Caselaw 10773 Ker

Kerala High Court

Shyja Jacob vs Girish on 12 April, 2024

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1946
                       WP(C) NO. 14791 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:

    1     SHYJA JACOB, AGED 69 YEARS
          W/O LATE JACOB, KANAPPILLY HOUSE, MANJUMMEL P.O ,
          ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683501

    2     BENNY JACOB, AGED 40 YEARS
          S/O LATE JACOB, KANAPPILLY HOUSE, MANJUMMEL P.O,
          ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683501

          R.PADMARAJ
          JOMY GEORGE
          M.J.BENNY
          R.AJITH KUMAR [V.K.EDOM]
          SAJEEVAN V.T.
          CHITRA N. DAS
          RISHAB S.
          ASWIN ASHOK V.
          ANJALI G KUTTY
          RINNU UDAYAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1     GIRISH, AGED 44 YEARS
          S/O KURUPATHU SANKURU, KURUPATHU HOUSE P VEMBALLUR,
          KODUNGALLUR, PIN - 680671

    2     MANJU, AGED 40 YEARS
          W/O GIRISH, KURUPATHU HOUSE P VEMBALLUR,
          KODUNGALLUR, PIN - 680671

    3     ABDUL SHAM, AGED 48 YEARS
          S/O ABDUL JABBAR, MADATHIL PARAMBIL HOUSE P VEMBALLUR,
          KODUNGALLUR, PIN - 680671

    4     AMBIKA, D/O AYYAPPAN, PANANGAT HOUSE P VEMBALLUR,
          KODUNGALLUR, PIN - 680671

    5     SATHEESHAN, AGED 50 YEARS
          S/O RAMAN, DESATHU PARAMBIL HOUSE P VEMBALLUR,
          KODUNGALLUR, PIN - 680671
 WP(C) NO. 14791 OF 2024
                                      2


     6       FATHIMA, AGED 50 YEARS
             W/O JAWAB, VALYAKATH HOUSE P VEMBALLUR,
             KODUNGALLUR, PIN - 680671

     7       MAJNATH, AGED 58 YEARS
             W/O ABDU KAREEM, PUNNILATH HOUSE P VEMBALLUR,
             KODUNGALLUR, PIN - 680671

     8       SARASWATHY, AGED 64 YEARS
             D/O KUMARAN, KOKKUVAYIL HOUSE P VEMBALLUR,
             KODUNGALLUR, PIN - 680671

     9       UMABHAI, AGED 72 YEARS
             W/O CHATHANPALLY KARUNAKARAN CHIRAVALLU,
             VELLUKKARA, THRISSUR, PIN - 680661

     10      VIPIN, AGED 54 YEARS
             S/O SREEDHARAN, KOLLAMPARAMBIL PULLUTTU,
             KODUNGALLUR, PIN - 680663

     11      ANURAJAN, AGED 69 YEARS
             S/O KESAVAN, KOONIYARA HOUSE P VEMBALLUR,
             KODUNGALLUR, PIN - 680671

     12      DASAN, AGED 60 YEARS
             KAITHAVALAPPIL HOUSE, KOORIKKUZHI P.O, THRISSUR,
             PIN - 680681

     13      STATION HOUSE OFFICER
             MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION, MATHILAKAM, THRISSUR
             DISTRICT, PIN - 680685

     14      STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO
             GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

             SRI.P.M.SHAMEER - GP
             SRI.ATHUL TOM


      THIS     WRIT       PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON    12.04.2024,      THE   COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 14791 OF 2024
                                 3


                             JUDGMENT

The petitioners allege that the party respondents are

meting out threats and intimidation to them and that they have

even demolished their compound wall illegally, asserting rights

over an approach road, over which they cannot claim so. They

say that there are several disputes pending between the parties

in Civil Courts; and therefore, that the actions of the party

respondents are illegal, which constrained them to approach the

13th respondent - Station House Officer through Ext.P8 seeking

protection, but that it has been denied to them.

2. Sri.R.Padmaraj - learned counsel for the petitioners,

explained that the title of the property in favour of his clients is

irrefutable from the various orders relating to the Civil Case

produced on record, namely, Exts.P4, P5 and P6; but that the

party respondents still demolished his clients' compound wall,

which is evident from Ext.P7 photograph. He thus reiteratingly

prayed that the Police be directed to afford his clients adequate

protection, so as to enable them to use their property in peace.

3. The learned counsel for respondents 1 to 9 and 12 -

Sri.Athul Tom, submitted that the afore assertions of the

petitioners are totally untrue and that his clients have never WP(C) NO. 14791 OF 2024

committed any act which is in violation of law, nor they

demolished the compound wall. He argued that the allegations

made by the petitioners are confutative and is intended to create

cause for their case before the Civil Court; but reiterated that

his clients do not intend to mete out any threat or intimidation to

them as alleged. He, however, prayed that every liberty

available to his clients before the competent Courts be left open.

4. Sri.P.M.Shameer - learned Government Pleader , also

submitted that there appear to be certain civil disputes between

the parties which are pending before the Civil Courts; and

therefore, that the Police cannot and will not interfere in the

same. He, however, added that, taking note of the complaint of

the petitioners, necessary steps have been taken to ensure that

law and order is maintained and that no one is allowed to take

law into their own hands; and that a constant vigil for this

purpose will be maintained by the Police.

5. I have examined the afore submissions, on the

touchstone of the various materials on record and the pleadings.

6. It is indubitable that the petitioners are involved in

certain civil disputes with the party respondents; and it is also

the assertion of the latter that such are still pending.

7. Be that as it may, the petitioners allege that their WP(C) NO. 14791 OF 2024

compound wall has been demolished and the Police say that

investigation into the same is going on. Obviously, such a

demolition, if found to be with criminal intent, is one that the

Police will have to look into; but it is not possible for this Court,

while acting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to

speak any further in this issue because the parties will have to

approach the competent Court for necessary resolution.

8. The above being said, the fact remains that it is without

doubt that the Police are enjoined to protect the lives of every

citizen. The learned Government Pleader, as recorded above,

says that steps for this has already been taken and that the

parties have not been allowed to make any threat or intimidation

to each other.

9. In the afore circumstances, recording the above

submissions of the learned Government Pleader, I allow this

writ petition, directing the first respondent to ensure that the

lives of the parties are adequately protected against each other

and that none of them are allowed to take law into their own

hands, or to commit any action which is in violation of law. It

shall also be ensured that peace is not breached by any of the

parties and that none of them are permitted to commit any

action which is contrary to the provisions of law, or the orders of WP(C) NO. 14791 OF 2024

Courts.

As far as the parties are concerned, their liberty to

approach the competent Court for necessary orders is left open.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 14791 OF 2024

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14791/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NUMBER 2891/2007 OF MATHILAKAM SUB REGISTRY, DATED 12.07.2007

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH SHOWING THE LYE OF THE PROPERTY AFTER LEAVING THE 10 FEET ROAD.

Exhibit P3           TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING    THE
                     CONSTRUCTED BOUNDARY WALL AND THE      NEW
                     PATHWAY.

Exhibit P4           A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OBTAINED     FROM
                     ECOURTS WEBSITE DATED 22.03.2024

Exhibit P5           A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT IN OS

NO. 350/ 2024 MUNSIFF COURT, KODUNGALLUR.

Exhibit P6 A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PATHWAY TAKEN AT THE TIME OF COMMISSION INSPECTION SHOWING THE BLOCKED ROAD BY THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED WALL

Exhibit P7 THE 2 PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE DEMOLISHED BOUNDARY WALL AT 2 PLACES OF THE PROPERTY

Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 02-04- 2024 BY THE SECOND PETITIONER TO THE MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION