Madras High Court
N.M.G.Asan Abdul Kader vs The Superintendent Of Police on 19 September, 2023
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 19.09.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
N.M.G.Asan Abdul Kader
... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Ramanathapuram.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Ervadi Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District.
3.Rubeela
4.Pullani ... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to
provide adequate police protection for the petitioner's peaceful
possession and enjoyment of landed property situated in
Ramanathapuram District, Ervadi Village, Punjai S.F.No.218/1 with total
extent of Acre 2.70 in furtherance of judgment and decree in O.S.No.8 of
1995 dated 25.04.2008 DMC Muthukulathur, based on the petitioner's
1/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
representation dated 06.05.2023.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.S.Sivaram
For Respondents : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
This petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2
police to provide adequate police protection for the peaceful possession
and enjoyment of the property situated at S.F.No.218/1, Ervadi Village,
admeasuring to an extent of 2.70 Acres in Ramanathapuram District, in
furtherance of judgment and decree in O.S.No.8 of 1995 dated
25.04.2008 based on the representation of the petitioner dated
06.05.2023.
2. As per the affidavit enclosed in this petition, the immovable
property to an extent of 2 acres and 70 cents in S.F.No.218/1 at Ervadi
Village was purchased by the petitioner's father by name Late.N.M.Kani
vide registered sale deed No.715 of 1968 dated 23.05.1968 and since
then the petitioner's father has been in possession and enjoyment of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
property. After his death, the petitioner and his family members have
been in possession and enjoyment of the same. All the revenue records
are in the name of the petitioner were mutated and patta No.1791 was
also granted in his favour. It is also submitted that there is a dilapidated
house in the landed property.
3. The mother of the third respondent has filed a suit for partition
against the petitioner's father and his vendor Abbas on the file of the
District Munsif Court, Mudhukulathur in O.S.No.8 of 1995 claiming 80
cents of the land in the above said property. On account of the death of
the petitioner's father during the pendency of the suit, the petitioner and
other legal heirs of his father were impleaded in the suit. After full-
fledged trial, the said suit was dismissed vide judgment dated 25.04.2008
confirming the title of the petitioner over the said property.
4. On 21.05.2023, when the petitioner was cleaning the property
purchased by his father by removing bushes, the third respondent along
with the legal heirs of the fourth respondent quarreled with the
petitioner's workman. The petitioner has filed a complaint to police who
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
have reached the said land and informed the police that the unofficial
respondents are interfering without any right. The petitioner has filed a
written complaint before the first respondent police which was registered
in C.S.R.No.114 of 2023. As per G.O.Ms.No.1580 Home (POL.VIII)
Department dated 24.11.2008, the respondents police required to provide
police protection. However, since the respondents police have not been
responding, the directions are sought for.
5. Notice given to the unofficial respondents. Though they
appeared before the Court, no counter is filed.
6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned
counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 4 and perused the record.
7. The Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.1580 dated 24.11.2008
wherein in Annexure-2, guidelines were given to the police officers to be
followed while dealing with the disputes relating to land and money
matters. He has further submitted that the respondents police will follow
the directions of this Court and provide protection in case it is necessary
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
as per G.O.Ms.No.1580 dated 24.11.2008.
8. As per the submissions made by learned counsel for the
petitioner, the petitioner and his family members are the owners of the
property situated in S.F.No.218/1 at Ervadi Village and that there is also
no record the unofficial respondents have no interest or possession or
title over the said property. The petitioner sought for providing police
protection. In case if the police direction is not granted, the unofficial
respondents may likely to interfere with the possession of the petitioners
and to prevent the petitioners from enjoying the same which amounts to
infringing the rights of the petitioner and also amounts to trespassing into
the property belonging to the petitioners.
9. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner
has suppressed the fact that the mother of the third respondent has filed
an application before the appellate Court for restoring A.S.No.1 of 2009
along with an application to condone the delay and the same is pending.
It is also further submitted that with the help of the police, the petitioner
is trying to dispossessing the third respondent from the possession and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
enjoyment of 70 cents of land. Merely because the mother of the third
respondent has filed an application for restoring A.S.No.1 of 2009 which
was dismissed for default does not automatically create any right in
favour of the third respondent against the petitioner. The civil Court has
dismissed O.S.No.8 of 1995 by holding that mother of third respondent
has no right in the land in S.F.No.218/1 at Ervadi Village. Therefore, non
mentioning of pendency of I.A. will not in any way affects the rights of
the third respondent.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
has been in possession in the entire property including 70 cents which is
being claimed by the third respondent and patta was also granted in their
favour and land revenue is being paid by them and they are in a
possession and that the third respondent is not in a possession of the said
property.
11. This Court has no record as to who is in possession of the
property and that this Court cannot also embark upon enquiry as to who
is in possession of the property. This petition is filed for a simple
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
direction to provide police protection. Considering the submissions on
both sides and on a perusal of the record, this petition is disposed of
directing the respondents police to consider the representation of the
petitioner dated 06.05.2023 on the strength of the civil Court decree and
if satisfied that the petitioner is in possession of the property. No costs.
19.09.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
PKN
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
To
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Ramanathapuram.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Ervadi Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
DR.D.NAGARJUN,J
PKN
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
Dated: 19.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12219 of 2023
DR.D.NAGARJUN,J.
Today this matter is listed under the caption "for being
mentioned" at the instance of learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the order
copy, dated 19.09.2023, passed in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12219 of 2023, in
paragraph No.3, it was inadvertently mentioned as 80 cents instead of 70
cents. Similarly, in paragraph No.11, this Court directed the respondents
police to consider the representation of the petitioner instead of the first
respondent police. He also made a fervent plea to consider and dispose of
the representation dated 06.05.2023 within a stipulated time frame.
Thereby, paragraph Nos.2 and 11 read as under:-
"The mother of the third respondent has filed a suit for partition against
the petitioner's father and his vendor Abbas on the file of the District Munsif
Court, Mudhukulathur in O.S.No.8 of 1995 claiming 80 cents of the land in the
above said property. On account of the death of the petitioner's father during
the pendency of the suit, the petitioner and other legal heirs of his father were
impleaded in the suit. After full-fledged trial, the said suit was dismissed vide
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
judgment dated 25.04.2008 confirming the title of the petitioner over the said
property.
11. This Court has no record as to who is in possession of the property
and that this Court cannot also embark upon enquiry as to who is in possession
of the property. This petition is filed for a simple direction to provide police
protection. Considering the submissions on both sides and on a perusal of the
record, this petition is disposed of directing the first respondent police to
consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.05.2023 on the strength
of the civil Court decree and if satisfied that the petitioner is in possession of
the property by following the guidelines issued vide proceedings in Rc.
007301/Genl.(1)/2019 dated 09.04.2019, as quickly as possible not later than
four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs."
3. Registry is directed to carry out the above said corrections
and issue fresh order copy to the parties concerned forthwith.
27.09.2023
PKN
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.12219 of 2023
DR.D.NAGARJUN,J.
PKN
Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12219 of 2023
27.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
