IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2011 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10990 of 2011(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. SEETHAMMA PANICKATHI, D/O. DEVAKI PANICKATHI, AGED 61 YEARS, KOTTINATTUSSERIL HOUSE, S.V.MARKET P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690 573. 2. SHANAVAS PANICKER S., S/O. SASIDHARAN, CHANDRALAYAM, S.V.MARKET P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690 573. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE(LAW & ORDER), POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM-691 001. 3. DY. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690 518. 4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690 518. 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690 518. 6. PRASANNAN, S/O. MADHAVAN, PUTHENPARAMBIL, S.V.MARKET P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690 518. W.P.(C). NO.10990/2011-W: 7. MOHANAN, S/O. CHELLAPPAN, MOHANA BHAVANAM, S.V.MARKET P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690 518. 8. RAVINATHAN, S/O. KARUNAKARAN, SHINU BHAVANAM, (THACHINAZHIKATH HOUSE), S.V.MARKET P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690 518. R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. T.K. VIPINDAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/04/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.10990 of 2011-W ***************************** Dated this the 6th day of April, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. Petitioners, a mother and her son have come to this Court seeking issue of directions under article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 1 to 5, police officials, to afford protection to them against apprehended culpable, contumacious and violent conduct on the part of respondents 6 to 8. 2. Petitioners claim to be trustees in respect of a property belonging to a temple. There was a civil litigation between the trust on the one hand and the predecessor in interest of the 8th respondent on the other. The petitioners had succeeded in that suit. Subsequently the 8th respondent purchased adjacent property from the judgment debtor in that suit. The 8th respondent is now raking up new disputes. Contrary to the situations of the decree, he is attempting to construct a compound wall. The petitioners are contemplating W.P(C) No.10990 of 2011-W 2 initiation of steps before the civil court to prevent such illegal conduct on the part of the 8th respondent. But in the meantime, they apprehend threat to their life from respondents 6 to 8. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. We have perused records. The dispute is in substance the objection of the petitioners against the attempt of the 8th respondent to construct a compound wall in his property. The petitioners attempted to obstruct the construction physically and it is then that the alleged threat to life and person arose. We have no hesitation to agree that the petitioners must, as stated by the counsel, approach the civil court and seek orders. Sans the civil dispute, we perceive no threat to the life of the petitioners. It is for the petitioners to approach the civil court and seek appropriate relief. We are not persuaded to agree that there is any threat to the lives of the petitioners independent of the dispute relating to property. The dispute relating to the property as stated earlier has to be authentically resolved. 4. This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but we make it clear that the dismissal is without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to approach the civil W.P(C) No.10990 of 2011-W 3 court for resolution of the dispute between them and the 8th respondent. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/