IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS FRIDAY, THE 23RD APRIL 2010 / 3RD VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 30154 of 2009(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JAGADAMMA, AGED 75 YEARS, D/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, THONIPPARA HOUSE, ANIKKADU MURI, AND VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KEEZHUVAIPUR POLICE STATION, PUNNAVELI, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. THE CIRCLE,INSPECTOR,OF POLICE, MALLAPPILLY, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. POTHAN VARGHESE(KOCHUMON) S/O.A.O.VARGHESE,ANGADIYIL HOUSE, PULLUKUTHIYIL, ANIKKADU KARA,PUNNAVELI(VIA), MALLAPPILLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. NOOROMMAVU, PIN-689 589. 4. A.O.VARGHESE,ANGADIYIL HOUSE, PULLUKUTHIYIL, ANIKKADU KARA,PUNNAVELI(VIA), MALLAPPILLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. NOOROMMAVU, PIN-689 589 5. RAVI, PRAMADIKUZHIYIL HOUSE, PULLUKUTHIYIL, ANIKKADU KARA,PUNNAVELI(VIA), MALLAPPILLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. NOOROMMAVU, PIN-689 589 6. DHAMODARAN PILLAI, PAYIKKAT HOUSE,KUNNUMBHAGAM, MANIMALA, ERATHUVADAKARA PO,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. R1 & 2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI. T.K. VIPIN DAS ADV. SRI.M.NARENDRA KUMAR FOR R3 TO R6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON 23/04/2010 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DT. 29.11.05 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DT. NIL GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DT. 6.6.08 ISSUED FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT'S OFFICE. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DT. 26.9.09 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DT. 27.9.09 ISSUED FROM THE FIRST RESPONDENT'S OFFICE. RESPONDENTS' EXTS: EXT.R3 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL JUDGMENT IN O.S.NO. 423/82 IN THE COURT OF MUNSIFF, TIRUVALLA. EXT.R3(a) TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT DT. 2.11.05. EXT.R3(b) TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT. 15.11.05. /TRUE COPY/ K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 30154 of 2009 N - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the ... day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph Francis, J. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed with the following prayer: “Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 and 2 to give adequate protection to the life and property of the petitioner.” 2. The case of the petitioner is as follows. The petitioner is a senior citizen and is residing alone in the co-ownership property belonging to her, her sisters and brothers. She is residing there for the last 75 years. She is unmarried and there is no male member in the house for her assistance. W.P.(C).No. 30154 of 2009 2 3. While the petitioner was living peacefully in the property, during the month of November 2005, respondents 3 and 4 at the instance and instigation of respondent No.6 trespassed into the property, cut and removed the rubber trees and tried to take possession of the same. These respondents, along with others, have also threatened the petitioner that they will do away with her and tried to demolish the very old residential building, where she is residing. The 6th respondent is none other than the husband of the petitioner's sister Chellamma. 4. The petitioner lodged a complaint before the 2nd respondent and sought for protection to her life. Ext.P1 is the copy of the complaint dated 290.11.2005 given by the petitioner to the 2nd respondent. In spite of Ext.P1 complaint, the 2nd respondent has not done anything in the matter and the illegal activities of respondents 3 and 4 continued. They have started cultivation in the property, where the petitioner is residing. When the petitioner objected, they threatened the petitioner to face dire consequences. Thereafter, she W.P.(C).No. 30154 of 2009 3 preferred another complaint to the 1st respondent narrating the facts. Copy of the said complaint is Ext.P2. Ext.P3 is the receipt dated 6.6.2008 issued from the office of the 1st respondent. 5. On receipt of Ext.P2 complaint, the petitioner was informed that they will charge a case against the miscreants and obtained the signature of the petitioner. But thereafter no action was taken by the 1st respondent. The person who has given statement to the police in support of the allegation of the petitioner was threatened by the goondas engaged by respondents 3, 4 and 6. Against which no action was taken by the 1st respondent. 6. On 25.9.2009, at about 10. a.m., respondents 3, 5 and 6 came with goondas, trespassed into the property, attached the house, untied the cow and removed the cow dung. The 5th respondent threatened the petitioner to ran way from the place. After some time they went away and thereafter the petitioner, who was hiding outside, came to her house. She again reported this matter to the 1st respondent by filing a complaint. But so far no effective and proper action is taken. Copy of W.P.(C).No. 30154 of 2009 4 the complaint dated 26.9.09 given by the petitioner to the 1st respondent is Ext.P4. Ext.P5 is copy of receipt dated. 27.9.2009 issued from the 1st respondent's office. 7. It is submitted that from 2005 onwards the petitioner is knocking the doors of respondents 1 and 2 for preventing the illegal activities of respondents 3 to 6 and to live peacefully without any threat to her life from them. But so far respondents 1 and 2 have not taken any adequate, effective and proper steps to redress the grievance of the petitioner. 8. Respondents 3 to 6 have filed counter affidavit opposing the prayer. 9. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the party respondents and the learned Government Pleader. 10. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the matter involves civil disputes. The petitioner is the sister of additional 7th respondent. 6th respondent is the husband of additional 7th respondent. Ext.R3 is the copy of final decree in O.S.No. 423 of W.P.(C).No. 30154 of 2009 5 1982 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Thiruvalla, by which 1 acre 339 sq.m. of properties is allotted to the share of additional 7th respondent and her children and 33.695 cents is allotted to the share of the petitioner herein, who was the second defendant in that suit. In the counter affidavit filed by respondents 3 to 6, it is stated that the parties to the suit took delivery of these properties through Court on 29.5.1998. In the counter affidavit it is stated that additional 7th respondent and her children executed an agreement for sale of the property with the third respondent on 2.11.2005. Ext.R3 is the copy of that agreement for sale. In the counter it is stated that the petitioner instituted O.S.No. 546 of 2005 before the Munsiff Court, Thiruvalla against the third respondent, which was withdrawn by the petitioner. According to respondents 3 to 7 the complaints filed by the petitioner before the police are false complaints. 11. Writ Proceedings are of a summary character and therefore ordinarily they have to be decided on the basis of admitted facts or affidavits. Dispute question of fact should not normally be gone into W.P.(C).No. 30154 of 2009 6 by a writ court. In this case, nothing is stated in the Writ Petition about Ext.R3 suit and further proceedings. It is not clear whether the petitioner has any right over the house situated in the disputed property. In these circumstances, we are not inclined to grant protection to the property, which is in disputed possession. If the life of the petitioner is threatened by respondents 3 to 7, there will be a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to give sufficient protection to the life of the petitioner from the threat of respondents 3 to 7. 12. This Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm