IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2011 / 3RD BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 21461 of 2011(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- CAPT.J.DAVID RAVI, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT BATHEL HOUSE, A.R.CAMP ROAD, MARYKUNNU P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 012. BY ADV. SRI.M.C.SEN, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. A.A.JOSEPH, S/O.AUGUSTINE, RESIDING AT AMBATT HOUSE, KAVILUMPARA, P.O.KUNDUTHODE, KOZHIKODE-673 513. 2. LEELAMMA JOSEPH, W/O.JOSEPH, RESIDING AT AMBATT HOUSE, KAVILUMPARA, P.O.KUNDUTHODE, KOZHIKODE-673 513. 3. SHAISE JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH, RESIDING AT AMBATT HOUSE, KAVILUMPARA P.O., KUNDUTHODE, KOZHIKODE-673 513. 4. SHYAM JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH, RESIDING AT AMBATT HOUSE, KAVILUMPARA P.O., KUNDUTHODE, KOZHIKODE-673 513. 5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THAMARASSERY POLICE STATION, THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE-673 580. 6. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BALUSSERY POLICE STATION, BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE-673 612. ADV. SRI.SUNNY VARGHESE FOR R1 TO R4 P.A.AUGUSTINE M.A.BABY V.K.SATHYANATHAN BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA (R5 & R6) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.21461/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1; COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15/6/2011. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN SUB COURT, KOYILANDI AS O.S. NO.94/2011 EXT.P3: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF THE IMPLEADING PETITION. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY RAMESH BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE ADMISSION TICKET ISSUED BY THE HOSPITAL WITH RESPECT TO NANDAKUMAR. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE COMPLAINTS PREFERRED BY NANDAKUMAR AND HIS WIFE BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P7; COPY OF THE COMPLAINTS PREFERRED BY NANDAKUMAR AND HIS WIFE BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P8; COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 11/4/11. EXT.P9; COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY M/S. HDFC LTD. EXT.P10; COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM M/S. LOW HEAT DIRERS PVT. LTD. DT.10/4/2010. EXT.P11: COPY OF THE DECLARATION GIVEN BY PETITIONER TO TRANSPORT MODERN RUBBER SHEET DRIER FROM KIZHAKKAMBALAM TO THE ESTATE OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P12; COPY OF THE ACCOUNT GIVEN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P13; COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY KINALUR SWASRAYA KARSHAKA SAMITHI EXT.P14; COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE PETITIONER'S WORKER NANDAKUMAR. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: EXT.R1; COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 10/9/2003. EXT.R2: COPY OF THE ELECTION ID CARD OF R1 EXT.R3: COPY OF THE INSTRUCTION FROM THE RUBBER BOARD. EXT.R4; COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASST. EXE.ENGINEER, BALUSSERY. EXT R5; COY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE GENERAL SECRETARY OF KINALUR SWASRAYA KARSHAKA SAMITHY. EXT.R6; COPY OF THE ASSIGNMENT DEED EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF R1 & R2. WPC 21461/2011 .2. EXT.R7; COPY OF ASSIGNMENT DEED EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF R3 EXT.R8; COPY OF THE ASSISGNMENT DEED EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF R4 EXT.R9; COPIES OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE ADV.RECEIVER. EXT.R10; COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR THE SURRENDER OF GUN LICENCE. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.21461 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioner a commercial pilot has approached this court seeking protection for his life and for properties claimed by him, from respondents 1 to 4 who are his own in-laws. Detailed pleadings have been raised by the parties and various materials also have been produced by them. 2. Sri.M.C. Sen, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Sunny Varghese learned counsel appearing for the party respondents addressed us in detail. The question is whether the police protection directions sought for in respect of the life of the petitioner and in respect of the property, which is part of what is popularly known as Kinaloor Estate, can be granted. 3. We shall first deal with the question of granting protection to the property in question. Admittedly and evidently O.S. No.94/2011 a suit for specific performance of a contract for WPC.No.21461/2011 2 sale has been filed by the party respondents before the Subordinate Judges Court, Koilandi . The first defendant in the suit is M/s.Cochin Malabar Estates and Industries Ltd., a company under liquidation proceedings. The suit is for specific performance of an agreement for sale allegedly executed by Sri. P.K.C.Ahammed who has purchased the estate from the company in an auction which was conducted by the Company Court. A reading of the papers pertaining to the Suit produced before us will show that party respondents are asserting possession over the property. Ext.P3 is copy of the application for impleadment filed by the petitioner herein seeking his impleadment in the said suit as supplementary defendant. We are told that the learned Subordinate Judge has not taken up Ext.P3 so far. The request of the learned senior counsel Mr.M.C.Sen was that as it is clear that there is a scramble for possession between the petitioner and the party respondents over the property i.e. Kinaloor Estate, this court may pass appropriate orders so as to ensure that the corpus of the litigation i.e. Kinaloor Estate is reserved for the successful party in the suit. The learned senior counsel also requested that the WPC.No.21461/2011 3 safety of the life of the petitioner and his workers should also be ensured by passing appropriate orders. 4. Sri. Sunny Varghese learned counsel for the party respondents submitted that any such order to be passed by this court will cause serious prejudice to the interest of the plaintiffs in O.S. No.94/2011. As regards protection for life the learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is yet to approach the police by filing any petition and much less Ext.P7. 5. Smt. C.M.Charisma learned Government Pleader on the basis of the instructions imparted to her by the police submitted that a crime was registered against the party respondents pursuant to a private complaint filed by the petitioner which was forwarded for investigation under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure arraying the party respondents as the accused. The above crime on investigation was found to be false and hence refer report is submitted. Smt.Charisma submitted that the police is yet to receive Ext.P7. According Mr.Sunny Varghese, the petitioner has not submitted any complaint directly to the police and much less Ext.P7. The learned senior counsel Mr.Sen submitted that Ext.P7 was actually submitted to the WPC.No.21461/2011 4 police, but the police being under the influence of the party respondents refused to accept Ext.P7. 6. Having considered the submissions addressed at the Bar and having gone through the pleadings and the materials placed before us, we feel that there is a scramble presently between the petitioner and the party respondents for the possession of Kilanoor Estate. As the Koyilandi Sub Court is already in seizin of the issue in the form of a suit for specific performance , ideally this issue will be considered by the Sub Court itself. Ext.P3 is pending before the Sub Court for impleadment of the petitioner. 7. Under the above circumstances, we direct the Subordinate Judge, Koyilandi to take Ext.P3 at the earliest, hear both sides and pass orders on Ext.P3 early and at any rate within 10 days of receiving a copy of this judgment. Once favourable orders are obtained by the petitioner on Ext.P3, the petitioner can file an application before the learned Subordinate Judge seeking appropriate interim relief. If any such application is filed by the petitioner, the Sub Judge will give top priority to such application and pass orders on that application in accordance with law after inviting objections from the party WPC.No.21461/2011 5 respondents who will be the respondents in the application. 8. We shall now deal with the question of granting protection to the life of the petitioner. We do not find reason not accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader that the police have not received Ext.P7 so far. We direct the 6th respondent - Sub Inspect of Police to entertain any petition which he may receive from the petitioner in future complaining of threat to his life or limbs, and to hold necessary enquiry immediately on such petition and to take appropriate action on the basis of the facts revealed in the enquiry so as to protect the life and limbs of the petitioner and his employees from danger. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE. dpk WPC.No.21461/2011 6