IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2011 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 27108 of 2011(K) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ N.INDIRA, D/O.SAROJINI, AISWARYA, NEDUNGOLAM.P.O., KOLLAM.PIN-691 334. BY ADV. SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, PARAVOOR.P.O., KOLLAM.PIN-691 301. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PARAVOOR, PARAVOOR.P.O., KOLLAM.PIN-691 301. 3. SUBHASHINI, W/O.SIVADASAN, SIVAVILASAM, NEDUNGOLAM.P.O., KOLLAM.PIN-691 334. 4. SUGUNAN, S/O.SIVADASAN, SIVAVILASAM, NEDUNGOLAM.P.O., KOLLAM.PIN-691 334. 5. SURESH, S/O.SIVADASAN, SIVAVILASAM, NEDUNGOLAM.P.O., KOLLAM.PIN-691 334. R1 & R2 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.K.ABOOBACKER R3 TO R5 BY ADV. SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.27108/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.494/1967. P2 COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 17/9/2010. P3 COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT, FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE ADDITIONAL TAHILDAR. P4 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 13/10/10. P5 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20/10/10. P6 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20/7/11. P7 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT SURVEY SUPRINDENT. P8 COPY OF THE RE-SURVEY PLAN OF SY.358 P9 COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 2/10/11 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No. 27108 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 31st day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioner, a lady and a retired bank employee, has approached this court alleging that the first respondent Sub Inspector of Police is harassing her at the instance of the party respondents. 2. Sri.M.K.Aboobacker learned senior Government Pleader on the basis of the instructions received from respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the accusations of police harassment are absolutely untrue. According to him, complaint was received from the petitioner as well as from the party respondents. The petitioner's attendance was solicited only in connection with the conduct of an eqnuiry into those two petitions. 3. We record all the submissions of the learned Government Pleader including his submission that the attendance of the petitioner is no longer required by the police in connection with the petitions already received. If in future any WPC.No.27108/2011 2 complaints are received then also attendance of the petitioner will be required only after sending notice under Section 160 of the Cr.P.C. to him. 3. Sri.Bhagavat Singh learned counsel for the petitioner drew our attention to relief No.2 in the writ petition and submitted that adequate protection against illegal interference of the party respondents in the construction of a compound wall as per Ext.P8 be granted. 4. Even though Mr.Bhagavat Singh was very persuasive , we do not find way to grant the above relief. Admittedly, suit is pending between the parties. It is open to the petitioner to move the Civil Court which is in seizin of the civil suit. We are sure that the learned Munsiff, Paravoor Kollam who is in seizin of the civil suit will appreciate the urgency projected by the petitioner and take a correct decision on the application filed by the petitioner. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE. dpk WPC.No.27108/2011 3