IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2011 / 8TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1306 of 2011(K) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. MADHAVAN, S/O.SANKARAN, THEKKEKKATTIL HOUSE P.O.,ARIYALLUR (TIRURANGADI TALUK)MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. DEVU, D/O.SANKARAN-DO-DO- 3. AYYAPPAN, S/O.CHATHAN,-DO-DO- BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, PARAPPANANGADI POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 303. 2. SRI.MURALEEDHARAN, S/O.DEVAKIYAMMA, VALIYATTOOR HOUSE, P.O.ARIYALLUR, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 312. 3. THUPRAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, PAROL PUTHUSSERI HOUSE, -DO-DO- R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.K.VIPINDAS R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.1306/2011 K APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE COMMISSIONER IN O.S.264/99 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, PARAPPANANGADI. P2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.S.264/99 DTD. 31/10/2002 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, PARAPPANANGADI. P3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE SUB COURT, TIRUR IN A.S.6/2003 DTD. 16/06/2010. P4: COPY OF THE PETITION AND THE ORDER THEREON IN I.A.510/03 IN AS.NO.6/2003 OF THE SUB COURT, TIRUR DTD. 14/03/2003. P5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT DTD. 3/12/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Civil) No.1306 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of January, 2011 Judgment Basant, J. The petitioners have come to this court with this petition for issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution to respondent No.1 to afford police protection to the life and person of the petitioners and also against any illegal obstruction of their right to use pathway through the property of respondents 2 and 3. 2. The petitioners were defendants in a suit filed by the respondents 2 and 3 and others. Respondents 2 and 3 and others claimed an injunction order restraining trespass by the petitioners into their property. By Ext.P2 judgment, the plaintiffs in that suit were given a decree of permanent injunction subject to the right of the petitioners to use the pathway marked as A J I in Ext.P1 plan. An appeal was preferred. During the pendency of the appeal, there was allegedly an attempt to obstruct the pathway by placing thorns on the pathway. That led to the court passing WPC 1306/2011 2 Ext.P4 order. The appeal has now been dismissed. 3. The petitioners now raise a grievance that their right to use the pathway is being illegally obstructed. Threat is caused to their life and person when they try to exercise their right of way which is recognised under Ext.P2 judgment. Ext.P2 judgment has now become final. 4. Notice was ordered to the respondents. Respondent No.3 has entered appearance. 5. Learned counsel for the third respondent submits that the plaintiffs in Ext.P2 suit have no intention whatsoever to obstruct the pathway marked as A J I in Ext.P1 which right of the petitioners is recognised in Ext.P2 judgment. But, according to the third respondent, there is absolutely no bonafides in the prayer of the petitioners for police protection. A reading of Ext.P5 produced along with the petition clearly reveals the real intentions of the petitioners. Under the guise of an order for police protection, they want to further improve and construct boundary walls for the alleged pathway. That is the real intention behind the claim for police protection now. The third respondent undertakes categorically that the right of way recognised under Ext.P2 shall not be obstructed. But the petitioners have no right WPC 1306/2011 3 and shall not be permitted to alter the present line in any manner or to further improve the pathway. The petitioners have no right under law to resort such activities. The petitioners cannot steal a march over the party respondents by successfully claiming an order for police protection with the intention of misusing it, submits the counsel. 6. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions submits that the police are not satisfied that there is any obstruction to the pathway recognised under Ext.P2. There is no threat to the life or person of the petitioners. The undertaking of the third respondent that the right of pathway of the petitioners recognised in Ext.P2 shall not be obstructed may be recorded. If there is any conduct inconsistent with such undertaking, the police shall take necessary action. But the police cannot and shall not in any way be party to the attempt of the petitioners to further improve the pathway or constructing compound walls for the pathway. The grievance raised in Ext.P5 complaint cannot be redressed by the police. The petitioners have to seek appropriate directions from the civil court for redressal of the grievances raised in Ext.P5, submits the learned Government Pleader. 7. We take note of the submission of the counsel for the WPC 1306/2011 4 third respondent that the third respondent shall not obstruct the right to use the pathway marked as A J I in Ext.P1. We record the submission of the learned Government Pleader that the police shall take necessary action in accordance with law if there is any obstruction contrary to the undertaking given. But we agree with the learned Government Pleader and the counsel for the third respondent that the petitioners under the guise of this order cannot be permitted to improve the pathway or in any manner alter the existing lie of the pathway. 8. We are satisfied that no further directions need be issued in the light of the stand taken by the counsel for the third respondent and the learned Government Pleader. 9. This petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed with the above observations. R.BASANT, JUDGE. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE. srd WPC 1306/2011 5 WPC 1306/2011 6