IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND APRIL 2009 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10837 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP 514/08 IN OS.736/2001 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- PETER, S/O. JOHN, MOOLAYIL POLAKULATHIL HOUSE, V.N. NAGAR, MAROTTICHODU BHAGOM, EDAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO SMT.C.M.CHARISMA SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PHILOMINA JOHN, PARAYANTHARA HOUSE, THRIKKATIYOOR KARA, KOTHAMANGALM 2. VICTORIA JOHN, MOOLAYIL POLAKULATH HOUSE, THRIKKATIYOOR KARA, KOTHAMANGALAM 3. JAMES JOHN, MOOLAYIL POLAKULATH HOUSE, THRIKKATIYOOR KARA, KOTHAMANGALAM. 4. THADEVUS, MOOLAYIL POLAKULATH, EDAPPALLY, KANAYANNUR TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.10837 of 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the first defendant in O.S.No.736 of 2001 on the file of the court of the Principal Munsiff of Ernakulam. The suit was filed for partition. A preliminary decree was passed in 2004. Final decree was passed on 25.6.2007. As per the final decree, plot A was allotted to the Writ Petitioner and plots D & E were allotted to respondent Nos.1 and 2. As per the final decree the pathway on the southern and eastern side of plot A and on the eastern side of plot D were set apart as pathway for the use of the plaintiffs to have access to plots D & E from the existing pathway on the southern side. The Execution Petition was filed for delivery of the property. When the Amin visited the property with the assistance of the Village Officer, the Writ Petitioner raised objection. It was alleged that when the work was going on, the petitioner obstructed the Amin and Village Officer from continuing with the measurement and the process of delivery. WPC No.10837/2009 2 The decree holders filed Ext.P4 application before the court below to provide necessary police assistance to the Amin and Village Officer to effect delivery of the plots allotted to the decree holders. In the affidavit accompanying the application, it was alleged that the Writ Petitioner is a person who was convicted for the offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. An appeal is pending against the conviction and sentence. It is also alleged in the application that the Writ Petitioner is having connection with the antisocial elements and he is having a criminal background. It is stated in the Writ Petition that the court below allowed Ext.P4 application. The order is not produced in the Writ Petition. 2. The petitioner filed Ext.P5 application dated 12th March 2009 to extent the time for delivery of the property. It is stated that that application was dismissed by the court below. The order therein is also not produced. The prayer in the Writ Petition is to set aside the order on Ext.P5 Execution Application dated 27.3.2009 and to issue a direction to the executing court to keep in abeyance the order passed in Ext.P4 application granting WPC No.10837/2009 3 police aid. I do not find any ground to interfere with the orders passed by the court below. Without understanding on what grounds the court below granted police aid and rejected the contention of the petitioner to adjourn delivery, it is not proper to admit the Writ Petition. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the orders in the appropriate proceedings, the Writ Petition is closed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl