IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2009 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 14306 of 2009(G) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- AJAYA KUMAR, S/O. THULASEEDHARAN PILLAI, REVATHY BHAVAN, VELLUMANNADY.P.O., VENJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.M.ZIYAD. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. S.I.OF POLICE, VENJARAMOODU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. CIRCLE INPSPECTOR OF POLICE, VENJARAMOODU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 3. AISHA BEEVI, SHAJI MANZIL, VELLUMANNADY, VENJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 4. RAJAN, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, RAJEEV BHAVAN, VELLARADA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. P.A. SALIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/05/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.R.RAMAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- Writ Petition (C) No.14306 of 2009-G -------------------------------------------------------- Dated 25th May 2009 Judgment RAMAN, J. There is no privity of contract between the petitioner and the third respondent. Admittedly, it is the 4th respondent who has entered into a contract with the petitioner for slaughter tapping. If so, the person aggrieved is the 4th respondent as far as the obstruction, if any is caused. In the absence of the 4th respondent coming as a petitioner and in the above factual situation, we can possibly grant no relief to the petitioner. The Writ Petition is dismissed. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta