IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2010 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 25150 of 2009(K) -------------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- V.J.JOHN, AGED 59 YEARS,VELLOORUZHATHIL VEEDU, THITTAMEL MURI,CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA. 2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,CHENGANNUR. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,CHENGANNUR. 5. MARIYAMMA SAMUEL, KAIPPALLIMADOM,PEEDIKAYIL, KEEZHCHERIMEL MURI,CHENGANNUR. 6. P.S.ANIYAN, KAIPPALLIMADOM,PEEDIKAYIL, KEEZHCHERIMEL MURI,CHENGANNUR. 7. PONNAPPAN PILLAI, GOVINDA VILASAM,KEEZHCHERIMEL MURI, CHENGANNUR. 8. BABUKUMAR, GOVINDA VILASAM,KEEZHCHERIMEL MURI,CHENGANNUR. 9. RAJENDRAN, GOVINDA VILASAM,KEEZHCHERIMEL MURI,CHENGANNUR. W.P.(C).NO.25150 OF 2009 K 10. K.T.THOMAS, KADAKKETHU VEEDU,ANGADICKAL MURI,CHENGANNUR. 11. SUKUMARAN, KALATHARAYIL VEETTIL, THITTAMEL MURI,CHENGANNUR. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI T.K. VIPINDAS. ADV. SRI.S.HARIKRISHNAN FOR R5 TO R11. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).NO.25150 OF 2009 K PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 25.8.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 17.3.2007 IN OS.NO.166/05 ON THE FILE OF THE HONOURABLE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHENGANNUR. EXT.R5(B) TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.525/05 OF CHENGANNUR POLICE IN C.C.NO.825/05 OF J.F.C.M., CHENGANNUR. EXT.R5(C) TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 31.8.2009 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT. // True Copy // PS to Judge K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P(C). NO. 25150 OF 2009 K --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th May, 2010 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief: “Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 to 4 to render adequate, effective and meaningful protection to the life of the petitioner and family.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is a non resident Indian. Respondents 5 to 11 are his tenants in an old building. Since the building is in a dilapidated condition and respondents 5 to 11 tried to modify the same, he filed OS.No.394/2005 and it was decreed. Respondents 5 to 11 violated the decree. Petitioner filed Execution Petition to prosecute them. Petitioner is taking steps WPC.25150/2009 K 2 to evict them by due process of law. Respondents 5 to 11 became inimical. A little away from the said shop rooms, petitioner is constructing a four storeyed building. It is stated that whenever he visited the said work site, respondents 5 to 11 and their henchmen used to abuse and threaten him. There is threat of life also. Petitioner made complaint as Ext.P1. 3. A Counter Affidavit is filed by respondents 5 to 11. Learned counsel for respondents 5 to 11 would submit that those respondents apprehend that if any order is granted, misusing the same, petitioner will evict the tenants in the building under cover of the order. It is also stated by the learned counsel for the party respondents that actually they are tenants of somebody- else and there has been no attornment to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no intention to forcibly evict respondents 5 to 11 and they will be evicted only in accordance with law. Learned counsel for respondents 5 to 11 would submit that they will not cause any threat and they have no intention. We record the WPC.25150/2009 K 3 submissions of the parties. We further direct that in case any threat by respondents 5 to 11, respondents 1 to 4 shall provide adequate protection for the life of the petitioner and his wife. We further make it clear that under the guise of this Order, petitioner cannot evict respondents 5 to 11 by force and being tenants, they can be evicted only in accordance with law. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge