IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2008 / 1ST MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 29726 of 2007(L) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- SUDHAKARA PANICKER, S/O.LATE KUNJAN PANICKER, AGED 79 YEARS, RESIDING AT VELASERRYIL VEEDU, CHINGOLI MURI. BY ADV. SRI.SAJITH KUMAR V. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT FOR HOME AFFAIRS, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THE DISTRICT POLICE HEADQUARTERS, ALAPUZHA. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRIKKUNNAPUZHA. 4. PRAKASHAN, S/O.KESAVAN, NEDIYAMPARAMBILKIZHAKETIL, PATHIYAMKARA MURI, THRIKKUNNAPUZHA. 5. MUHAMMED, S/O.HASSANARUKUNJU, NEDIYAMPARAMBILKIZHAKETIL, PATHIYAMKARA MURI, THRIKKUNNPUZHA. 6. PRATHEEP, S/O.PRABHAKARAN, VADAKKEPARAMBIL NEDIYAMPARAMBILKIZHAKETIL, PATHIYAMKARA MURI, THRIKKUNNAPUZHA. 7. BIJU, S/O.VIJAYAN, CHALINKAL, NEDIYAMPARAMBILKIZHAKETIL, PATHIYAMKARA MURI, THRIKKUNNAPUZHA. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SALIM P.A. R4 TO R7 BY SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL SRI.V.MADHUSUDHANAN SRI.PRAMJI PAUL VAZHAPPILLY SRI.V.VENUGOPAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.29726/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1(a):- COPY OF THE LAND REVENUE RECEIPT DT. 2.7.01 PAID BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE LAND REVENUE RECEIPT DT. 25.2.03 PAID BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE PETITION DT. 20.7.07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 2.8.07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALLEPPY. ANNEXURE R3(a):- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT. ANNEXURE R3(b):- COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA. 1546/06 IN OS. 264/06. ANNESURE.R3(c):- COPY OF THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE .R3(d):- COPY OF THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE R3(e):- COPY OF THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT. EXT.R4(a):- COPY OF THE PLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OS. NO.264/06 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, HARIPAD. /TRUE COPY/ P.SA.T O JUDGE tss K.Balakrishnan Nair & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ======================== W.P(C).No.29726 of 2007 ======================== Dated this the 21st day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair,J. The petitioner is the owner of two plots of land having an extent of 47 Ares and 73 Ares respectively. The petitioner submitted that its boundaries are well demarcated. There is a pathway on one side of the property. Respondents 4 to 7 are using that pathway and they are trying to widen that pathway and in that process, trying to encroach into the property. Therefore, he moved the civil court and obtained an interim injunction against them restraining them from trespassing into the property for widening the pathway. 2. While so, the petitioner contended that he is being prevented from going to his above mentioned plots of land to take the usufructs. Respondents 4 to 7 are threatening him with physical harm. Therefore, he filed a representation before the police and thereafter this writ petition is filed seeking appropriate reliefs. Ext.P2 is the representation stated to be filed before the Sub Inspector of Police. It was followed by Ext.P3 representation before the Superintendent of Police. 3. The third respondent filed a statement in which it is stated that Ext.R3(a) is the petition filed by the petitioner before the police and not Ext.P2. There is no dispute regarding the WP(C) 29726/07 -: 2 :- petitioner enjoying his property. The only dispute between the parties is relating to the pathway, it is submitted. 4. Respondents 4 to 7 also have filed counter affidavit. According to them, the pathway has got 3 metres width. Now it is reduced to 3 feet width. The said dispute is pending before the competent civil court. If respondents 4 to 7 are causing any obstruction to the petitioner taking usufructs from his property, he may inform the third respondent. In that event, the third respondent will remove the obstruction. But this order shall not enable the petitioner to resolve the dispute regarding the pathway in his favour. The dispute concerning the pathway has to be resolved by the competent civil court. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. K.Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 21/1