IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 21ST FEBRUARY 2011 / 2ND PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 3389 of 2011(W) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SUHARA ALIYAR, AGED 46 YEARS, W/O.ALIYAR, KIZHAKKEVEETTIL HOUSE, KOOVALLOOR, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POTHANIKKAD, KOTHAMANGALAM, PIN-686672. 2. MANAGER, MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-30. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 3389 OF 2011 ......................................................................... Dated this the 21st February , 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this court with the following prayers: i) issue a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ or order restraining the 1st respondent from abetting or aiding the 2nd respondent or grant protection to them for seizing the vehicle bearing registration No.KL/44/7334 Tipper Lorry from the possession of petitioner without the order of a competent court; and ii) issue such other appropriate writ or order which is deemed just and necessary on the facts and circumstances of the case. “ 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that apprehending forceful re-possession of the vehicle bearing No. KL.44/7334. the petitioner had earlier approached the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam by filing O.S.No. 545 of 2009, wherein the second respondent had conceded that they will not take possession of the vehicle forcefully and accordingly the matter was disposed of. The learned Counsel further submits that W.P.(C) No. 3389 OF 2011 2 inspite of the said undertaking, the second respondent has approached the first respondent and that the steps are being pursued to take possession of the vehicle forcefully by the first respondent at the instance of the second respondent . 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent submits that no such steps are taken to take possession of the vehicle in a forceful manner. The submission is recorded and the matter is closed as this Court does not find it necessary to issue any notice to the second respondent in view of the submission on behalf of the first respondent. It is made clear that the second respondent will be at liberty to proceed with appropriate steps in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk