IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 23RD OCTOBER 2009 / 1ST KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 28845 of 2009(A) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- V.S.MOHANDAS VAIDYAN, S/O.SUBRAHMANIAN VAIDYAN, AGED 45 YEARS, VELIYATH PARAMBIL HOUSE, OLIPPARA, KAYARADI VILLAGE, CHITTOOR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.DENIZEN KOMATH & SRI.SHERRY J. THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NENMARA CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NENMARA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD. 3. RAGHU, S/O.KANDUKUTTAPPAN, CHEVAKKULATH HOUSE, THENGUMPADOM, KAYARADI POST, PALAKKAD. 4. RAMESH, S/O.KANDUKUTTAPPAN, CHEVAKKULATH HOUSE, THENGUMPADOM, KAYARADI POST, PALAKKAD. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.N. SUKUMARAN. R3 & R4 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2- WP(c) No.28845 of 2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: Ext.P1: True photocopy of the Certificate of sale of the property in auction. Ext.P2: True photocopy of the complaint preferred by the petitioner before the first respondent dated 10.10.2009. (True copy) K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.28845 of 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this, the 23rd day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner submits that he is an ayurvedic physician and he is suffering from 50% physical disability. He has purchased 10 cents of land in a public auction held by Nemmara Urban Bank Ltd. No.155. Ext.P1 is the sale certificate relating to the said property. When the petitioner went to the property, he alleges respondents 3 and 4 caused physical obstructions to him and attempted to manhandle him. Feeling aggrieved by the said action of respondents 3 and 4 he preferred Ext.P2 petition before the police seeking police protection to his life. Alleging that there is inaction on the part of the police, the Writ Petition was filed seeking appropriate reliefs. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit, in which it is submitted that he has purchased two cents of land as per Ext.R4(1) registered sale deed. The petitioner WPC No.28845 of 2009 - 2 - interfered with the attempt of the 4th respondent to put up a fence on the boundary of his property, purportedly on the strength of Ext.P1 sale deed. According to him, the petitioner and his friends tried to manhandle respondents 3 and 4. Therefore, he preferred Ext.R4(2) petition before the S.I. of Police seeking necessary police assistance. 2. The C.I. of Police has filed a statement, in which it is submitted that upon receipt of Ext.P2 complaint, he caused an enquiry into the matter through the S.I. of Police and the S.I. found that there is dispute between the parties concerning the identity of the properties covered by Exts.P1 and R4(1). So, the S.I. of Police has directed the parties to approach the Village Officer to measure the property according to the survey plan. The S.I. of Police has also assured to render necessary police assistance to conduct the survey. The Circle Inspector has also submitted that if any criminal acts are committed by anyone, the police would take necessary action. WPC No.28845 of 2009 - 3 - 3. Having regard to the nature of the dispute between the parties, we think it is not proper to order protection to one side or the other. But, we record the submission of the Circle Inspector of Police that appropriate action in accordance with law will be taken if anybody violates the law. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- K. Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. Sd/- P. Q. Barkath Ali, Judge. DK. (True copy)