IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND APRIL 2008 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10342 of 2008(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ LALI THOMAS, KIZHAKKOTTUCHARINJATHIL VEEDU, NETTOOR MURI, KULANADA VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.B.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANDALAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANDALAM. 4. MATHAI VARGHESE, KALLUMPURATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, MANTHUKA MURI, KULANADA VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR- R4 GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.A.SALIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 10342/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 - A TRUE COPY OF O.S.NO.220/2007 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT (VACATION COURT) AND NOW PENDING BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA. EXT.P2 - A TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND HER HUSBAND IN O.S.NO.220/2007 DATED 18.3.2007. /TRUE COPY/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.10342 OF 2008-F ----------------------------------------- Dated 2nd April, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner has approached this Court, alleging that the 3rd respondent is interfering in a civil dispute and harassing her. The said respondent is compelling her to vacate from the residential building where she is staying. She also points out that there is a suit filed by the 4th respondent and Ms.Sherin Mariam Jose, a minor against her, seeking to restrain her from alienating or encumbering the said property. While so, the police are summoning her and compelling her to sign an agreement, agreeing to vacate the premises. In the suit the petitioner has filed a written statement and has raised a counter claim. Feeling aggrieved by the interference of the police in this civil dispute, this Writ Petition is filed. 2. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that the allegations against the 3rd respondent are absolutely unfounded. When a complaint was received against the petitioner, the police only enquired into it. They have no intention, whatsoever, to interfere with the civil dispute, it WPC 10342/2008 2 is submitted. 3. The learned counsel for the 4th respondent submitted that the real owner of the property is the 2nd plaintiff in Ext.P1 suit. 4. In view of the submission of the learned Government Pleader, which we have noticed above, no further orders are required in this writ petition. Accordingly, it is closed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. Nm/