Madras High Court
K.K.M.Muthiah Kone vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 26 August, 2025
Author: B.Pugalendhi
Bench: B.Pugalendhi
Crl.OP(MD)No.12220 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 26.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
Crl.OP(MD)No.12220 of 2025
K.K.M.Muthiah Kone : Petitioner
Vs.
1.State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by the Inspector of Police,
E-3 Anna Nagar Police Station,
Madurai City.
2.K.K.M.Balakrishnan : Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 528 BNSS [482 CrPC] to direct the
first respondent to provide adequate police protection to the life and limb
of the petitioner and his family members.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.K.Gopalan
For Respondents : Mr.P.Kottaichamy,
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
for R.1
Mr.P.T.S.Narendra Vasan for R.2
*****
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:19:20 pm )
Crl.OP(MD)No.12220 of 2025
ORDER
Seeking police protection, the petitioner has filed this instant original
petition.
2.The petitioner claims that he has been allotted with Shop No.J239,
Flower Market Complex, Mattuthavani, Madurai. According to him, the
second respondent, who is his father's second wife's son, is disturbing with
his possession and peaceful enjoyment of the property. Therefore, the
petitioner has filed a civil suit as against the second respondent before the
District Munsif Court, Madurai, in OS.No.1182 of 2011. The said suit was
decreed in his favour and permanent injunction has been granted as against
the second respondent with regard to the shop in No.J239. The second
respondent challenged the decree by filing an appeal before the III
Additional Sub Court, Madurai, in AS.No.19 of 2019 and the same was
dismissed. In the meantime, the second respondent himself has filed a suit
in OS.No.159 of 2016 before the Principal District Munsif Court, Madurai. It
was dismissed on 01.04.2022 and the appeal preferred by the second
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:19:20 pm )
respondent as against the same in AS.No.41 of 2022 before the Sub Court,
Madurai, was also dismissed on 19.11.2024. As against the dismissal of his
appeal suits, the second respondent has filed second appeals before this
Court in SA(MD)Nos.391 of 2023 and 158 of 2025. Both the second appeals
were disposed of as under:-
“19. At this juncture, in view of the advice of the learned counsel
for the appellant, a better sense prevailed, and the plaintiff has also now
agreed that he will give up his claim and be satisfied if the defendants 1
and 2 come forward to execute the sale deed in his favour also within the
time frame in respect of the shop No.K268, for which allotment was
made in his favour. To this aspect, the learned standing counsel for the
defendants 1 and 2, on instructions from the officers who are present
before this court, submits that immediately within four weeks from the
date of disposal of these second appeals, they will execute the sale deed in
favour of the plaintiff in respect of shop No.K268.”
3.Even then, the second respondent is interfering with his possession
and therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking police
protection.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:19:20 pm )
4.Learned Counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the judgment and
decree granted in favour of the petitioner and by referring the Government
Order in G.O.Ms.No.1580, Home Department, dated 24.11.2008, sought for
police protection.
5.Considering the decree passed by the civil Court in favour of the
petitioner, this Court was about to allow this application. At that time, the
learned Counsel for the second respondent submitted that the second
respondent was not interfering with the possession of the petitioner with
regard to Shop No.J239, however, he reserves his right for the Shop
No.K268, that it has been allotted to him.
6.Considering this submission of the learned Counsel for the second
respondent, this Court directed the second respondent to file an affidavit of
undertaking to that effect. Accordingly, the second respondent has filed an
affidavit as under:-
“The 2nd respondent continues to be in possession of the Shop
No.K268 allotted to him and the 2nd respondent is hereby undertakes
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:19:20 pm )
that he will not disturb the possession of the petitioner in respect of Shop
No.J239. To that effect, the 2nd respondent herein is filing this
undertaking affidavit.”
7.In view of the affidavit of undertaking, this criminal original
petition stands disposed of with a direction to the second respondent not to
interfere with the possession of the petitioner with regard to the Shop
No.J239. In the event if the second respondent continues to interfere with
the same, it is the responsibility of the first respondent Police to provide
appropriate protection as per G.O.Ms.No.1580, Home Department, dated
24.11.2008 and also to take necessary action as against the second
respondent.
Internet : Yes 26.08.2025
gk
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
E-3 Anna Nagar Police Station,
Madurai City.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:19:20 pm )
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
gk
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
26.08.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:19:20 pm )
