IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 21417 of 2010(B) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SARASWATHY.S,W/O.LATE SUBRAMONIAN, AGED 50 YEARS, 39/235(6),GOKULAM,FRIENDS NAGAR, CHALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.MOHANAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. LAKSHMI THIRUMALAI, 39/235,GOKULAM, FRIENDS NAGAR, CHALA, THIRUVANANANTHAPURAM, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 288, GOKULAM, CHINTHAMANI COMPOUND, MELETHERU KARAI, KRISHNAN KOVIL, NAGAR COIL P.O. 2. PARVATHY, W/O.PADMARAJAN, T.C.39/235,GOKULAM, FRIENDS NAGER, CHALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. PADMARAJAN,T.C.39/235,GOKULAM, FRIENDS NAGAR, CHALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SUBBAMMAL, T.C.39/235,GOKULAM, FRIENDS NAGAR, CHALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FORT POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FORT POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 8. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (LAW & ORDER) POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.K.MADHUSOODHANAN NAIR SRI.K.K.SETHUKUMAR. 5 TO R8 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.KHARISHMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.21417/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE FI IN CRIME NO.995/09 REGISTERED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE PETITION DT. 27.6.2010 SUBMTITED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 8TH RESPONDENT. P3:- COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT DTD. 23.4.10 ISSUED BY CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM. P4:- COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT DTD. 13.5.2010 BY CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM. P5:- COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT DTD. 6.4.2010 ISSUED BY VILLAGE OFFICER, MANACAUD. P6:- COPY OF THE INTIMATION DTD. 16.8.2010 ISSUED BY THE CORPORATION OF TRIVANDRUM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R1(a):- COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED DTD. 16.2.2008 NO.610/2008 OF SRO, CHALA. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.C.No.21417 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of November 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.JOSEPH,J The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing commanding the respondents 5 to 8 to afford sufficient and adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioner from respondents 1 to 4; ii) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 5to 8 to take follow-up action on Exhibit.P1 so as to deter the respondents 1 to 4 from any further atrocities against the petitioner. 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: 3. The petitioner is a widow. She is in absolute ownership and possession of 668 sq.ft. of homestead. Respondents 1 & 2 are the sisters of the petitioner. 3rd W.P.C.No.21417 of 2010 2 respondent is the husband of the 2nd respondent. 4th respondent is her mother. As per partition deed No.610 of 2008 of SRO, Chala, the petitioner has got the central portion of the building. It is stated that the petitioner was attacked on 05/12/2009 by the 2nd respondent with the help of her elder brother. Crime is registered and Ext.P1 is the F.I.R. She submitted Ext.P2 petition also. Counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 4. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit also. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent 1 to 4 and the learned Government Pleader. Adv.Sri.C.K.Mohanan, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner wants to put up a bathroom in the share of her property as per Ext.R1(a) partition deed; but respondents 1 to 4 obstructed the petitioner from constructing the bathroom. She refers to Ext.P6 communication from the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation and it is described as permit in her favour. Per contra, the learned counsel for the party respondents would point out that a civil dispute is pending and there is dispute between the parties and the idea of the petitioner is to induct strangers in the building. W.P.C.No.21417 of 2010 3 The learned Government Pleader would also submit that a complaint is received. Crime has been registered and partition deed has been cancelled. The learned counsel for the party respondents would also point out that actually Ext.P6 cannot be treated as permit. It is only a communication from the Corporation indicating that no permit is required for partitioning the property. 5. A writ of mandamus in respect of property rights will lie when the matter is in dispute when there is an adjudication by a competent forum. Secondly, this is not a case where we can hold that the petitioner is without any alternate remedy. The petitioner has alternate remedy by approaching the competent civil court and seeking reliefs against respondents therein by way of injunction and it will be open to the petitioner to seek interim relief also against the respondents if they are obstructing the petitioner in the exercise of her property rights. It may not be open to the petitioner to straight away come to the High Court to get the property rights declared and then direct the police to enforce property rights. We would think that it is for the petitioner to relegate to approach the competent civil court W.P.C.No.21417 of 2010 4 and seek relief including interim relief against respondents 1 to 4, as she is advised. 6. As is well settled if interim order is granted by the civil court with notice to the parties, it is also open to the party in whose favour interim order is granted, to seek police protection also from the very same civil court. Without prejudice to all the remedies which the petitioner may have in law, this writ petition is dismissed. We make it clear that we have not pronounced anything on the merits of the matter. If the matter comes before the civil court, the civil court will consider the matter untrammeled by anything contained in this judgment. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.C.No.21417 of 2010 5 W.P.C.No.21417 of 2010 6 K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 30/082010