IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2011 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 6128 of 2010(M) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- P.SASI, THYKKOOTTATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, ERICHELLOOR, KARODE PO, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARASSALA. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARASSALA. 3. JALALUDHEEN, SUBAHAN MANZIL, VLANGAMURI, KADAVATTARAM, NEYYATTINKARA P.O, NEYYATTINKARA. 4. KAMALUDHEEN, SHEEJA COTTAGE, ALUMMOODU, NEYYATTINKARA. ALUMMOODU.P.O., TVM. 5. SALIM, MEDAYIL VEEDU, OPP .MOSQUE, PARASSALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. 6. MURUGAN, LAKSHMI MANDIRAM, VADAKKE GRAMAM, OPP .MOSQUE, PARASSALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.6128/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE PLAINT INSTITUTED BY THE PETITIONER AS O.S.NO.125/2010 OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, NEYYATTINKARA. P2 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18/2/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P3 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE FIRST ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT IN I.A.NO.742/2010 IN O.S.125/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.6128 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th March, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. This petition for police protection, filed as early as on 23.2.2010, remains without disposal even now. Service is not complete. Steps have not been taken. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a tenant under the third respondent of two rooms. There was an attempt to forcibly throw the petitioner out of possession. The petitioner has already gone to the civil court and has obtained an order of injunction. No interim orders have been passed in this writ petition so far. 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are satisfied that no further directions are necessary in this writ petition. It is evident that the petitioner has already secured orders from the civil court. No further directions appear to be necessary. This writ petition is in these circumstances dismissed. R.BASANT JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/