IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2011 / 1ST MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 38783 of 2010(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ AMINA, W/O.ABDUL RAHIM, KULAPPURATH KIZHAKKETHIL, KAYYALAKKAL CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM - 691 011. BY ADV. SRI.VINOD J.DEV RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 001. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM.691001. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERAVIPURAM, KOLLAM.691 011. 4. CHANDRABABU, S/O.KOCHUKRISHNAN, CHANDRAVILASATH, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, VALATHUNGAL P.O., KOLLAM.691 011. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.CHARISHMA R4 BY ADV. SRI.SHABU SREEDHARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.38783.2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 28.12.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 28.12.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Civil) No.38783 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of January, 2011 Judgment Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this court with this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for issue of directions to respondents 1 to 3 to afford police protection to her to prevent violent, contumacious and culpable conduct on the part of the 4th respondent directed against her. 2. According to the petitioner, there was an earlier financial transaction between her and the 4th respondent. According to her, she has completely discharged the liability. The 4th respondent is still attempting to stake false claims against her. He is trying to get some documents which are available with her. The 4th respondent comes to the house of the petitioner and unnecessarily harasses her. Police protection may be afforded to her to live in peace in her house without any threat or violence against her by the 4th respondent. This, in short, is the prayer. WPC 38783/2010 2 3. Notice was ordered. All the respondents have entered appearance. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The 4th respondent takes the stand that the allegations are false. There is an agreement between the 4th respondent on the one hand and the petitioner and her husband on the other. That agreement is for sale for immovable property. Substantial amounts has been paid by way of advance also. The 4th respondent is willing to pay the balance amount but the petitioner and her husband are not complying with the terms of the said agreement. In connection with the civil dispute, it is true that the 4th respondent had occasion to go to the house of the petitioner. According to the 4th respondent, the petitioner and her husband took time to settle the issue. But they have not acted in compliance of the undertakings given by them. In these circumstances, the 4th respondent was constrained to approach the civil court and O.S.No.656 of 2010 has been filed before the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kollam for specific performance of the said agreement for sale of immovable property. 4. The 4th respondent asserts that he has no intention to go WPC 38783/2010 3 to the house of the petitioner now. Earlier he had gone only for an attempt to settle the dispute between the parties. He undertakes that the suit having been filed and legal remedy having been claimed through the civil court, he does not want to and shall not go to the house of the petitioner or cause any harassment or vexation to her. The 4th respondent is prepared to wait for relief to be granted to him by the civil court. This undertaking may be recorded. There is no necessity to afford any police protection for the petitioner, submits the learned counsel for the 4th respondent. 5. The learned Government Pleader submits that at the moment and after the issue of the interim orders by this court in this writ petition, there is no threat or risk against the life and person of the petitioner. Parties are already before the civil court. The 4th respondent's undertaking that he shall not go to the house of the petitioner can be accepted. If there is any conduct inconsistent and conflict with the said undertaking, respondents 1 to 3 shall take necessary actions, submits the learned Government Pleader. WPC 38783/2010 4 6. We are satisfied, in these circumstances, that no further specific directions are necessary. We accept the undertaking of the 4th respondent. We also accept the undertaking of the learned Government Pleader. This writ petition is, in these circumstances, allowed in part to the above extent. R.BASANT, JUDGE. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE. srd