IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2008 / 29TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 12567 of 2008(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RADHAMMA, W/O.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, CHERIYAMPALLOOR VEETTIL, MEENATHU CHERRY, SAKTHIKULANGARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHAVARA. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SAKTHIKULANGARA POLICE STATION. 5. SIVADASAN NAIR, S/O.SANKARAN NAIR, MOOTHAMVADHUKKAL VEEDU, MEENATHU CHERRY, KAVANAD P.O., SAKTHIKULANGARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM. 6. CHANDRAN NAIR, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR. 7. SARASWATHY AMMA, D/O.DEVAKI AMMA, MOOTHAM VATHUKKAL VEEDU, MEENATHUCHERRY, SAKTHIKULANGARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.ALEX N.MATHEW (KOLLAM) FOR R5 & R7 SRI.H.RAMANAN FOR R5 & R7 SRI.JAMES JOSE FOR R5 & R7 SRI. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 12567/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN O.S.776/2003 AND O.S.NO.778/2003 OF THE COURT OF ADDL MUNSIFF, KOLLAM. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT & DECREE IN O.S.NO.808/2003 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE S.P. OF POLICE, KOLLAM. /TRUE COPY/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 12567 OF 2008-U ----------------------------------------- Dated 21st October, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner has approached this Court, alleging that the 4th respondent interfered in a civil dispute between her and the 7th respondent, which is pending before the Munsiff's Court, Kollam. She preferred Ext.P3 representation before the 2nd respondent Superintendent of Police, Kollam, pointing out the alleged high-handed actions of the 4th respondent. Thereafter, this Writ Petition is filed, seeking appropriate direction to the police not to interfere in this civil dispute. 2. The learned counsel appearing for respondents 5 and 7 submitted that the dispute between the said respondents and the petitioner is pending before the civil court and they have no role, whatsoever, in the alleged harassment of the petitioner by the 4th WPC 12567/2008 2 respondent. 3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that on receiving a petition from the daughter of the 7th respondent, the 4th respondent tried to settle the matter. The 4th respondent denied the allegations of the petitioner. 4. Going by the contents of Ext.P3, we feel that the 2nd respondent should look into the allegations raised therein. If there is some truth in them, it is a very serious matter and action should be taken against the 4th respondent. Therefore, the 2nd respondent is directed to look into Ext.P3 complaint filed by the petitioner before the said officer in accordance with law within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. Nm/