IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2009 / 16TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18905 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. RAJEEV.P.J., AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.JANARDHANA KARTHA RESIDING AT "RAKHENDU", PULIPRASSERIL, K.R.PURAM PO, CHERTHALA. 2. BINDUMOL, AGED 37 YEARS, WIFE OF RAJEEV P.J, RESIDING AT "RAKHENDU" PULIPRASSERIL, K.R.PURAM PO, CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.H.B.SHENOY SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY SMT.LAKSHMI B.SHENOY SRI.ABU MATHEW SRI.SOBHAN GEORGE SRI.THOMAS P.MAKIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE S.I.OF POLICE, CHERTHALA POLICE STATION, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DIST. 2. SUDHIR, S/O.MANI, PAININKAL VELIYIL, K.R.PURAM PO, CHERTHALA 685 556. 3. SANJO, S/O.RAJAPPAN, PAININKAL VELIYIL, K.R.PURAM PO, CHERTHALA 685 556. 4. SUNILKUMAR, S/O.PADMANABHAN, PAININIKAL VELIYIL, K.R.PURAM PO, CHERTHALA 685 556. W.P.(C) No.18905 of 2009 : 2 : 5. SANTHA, W/O MANI, PAININKAL VELIYIL KR.PURAM, PO, CHERTHALA - 685 556. 6. SANTHA, W/O.RAJAPPAN, PAININKAL VELIYIL, K.R.PURAM PO, CHERTHALA 685 556. 7. LEEL,A W/O. PADMANABHAN, PAININKAL VELIYIL, KR.PURAM PO, CHERTHALA, 685556. 8. VALSA, W/O. SUKUMARAN, PAININKAL VELIYIL ,KR.PURAM PO, CHERTHALA - 685 556. 9. RAJESH P.J, S/O. JANARDHANAN KARTHA, PULIPRASSERIL, K.R.PURAM PO, CHERTHALA 685556. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.A.SALIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 18905 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 7th July, 2009 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. Petitioners complaint repeated violation of order of injunction passed by the Civil Court. According to the first petitioner, a fence was constructed as directed by the Munsiff Court, but subsequently it was demolished, which is a subject matter of an enquiry before the Court. Ext.P9 would show that Advocate Commissioner has already been appointed to ascertain the truth. In such circumstances, the petitioners have already invoked the remedy available under law rightly. Based on the Commission report, if the violation is established, certainly, he can seek appropriate relief for re-construction of the fence with police aid, and if an application is made to that effect, we have no doubt that the civil court will consider the same and pass appropriate orders. W.P.(C) No.18905 of 2009 2 That being the case, it is not a fit case for interference at this stage. Subject to the observation stated above, the writ petition is dismissed. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN , JUDGE. nj.