IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 28TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3501 of 2010(K) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. MOHANAN, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. KUNJUKRISHNAN, BIMAL NIVAS, ATTINGAL. 2. SHEELA, W/O. MOHANAN, BIMAL NIVAS, ATTINGAL. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF SRI.K.ACHANKUNJU RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, SANGHUMUGHAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-11. 3. R.SUDHA, W/O. SASIDHARAN, MEDAYIL VEEDU, OPP: INDIAN OIL PETROL PUMP, ULLOOR VILLAGE, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SASIDHARAN, S/O. LATE SATHYABHAMA, REPRESENTED BY NEXT FRIEND AND WIFE R.SUDHA, MEDAYIL VEEDU, OPP: INDIAN OIL PETROL PUMP, ULLOOR VILLAGE, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.3501 of 2010-K ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 17th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioners seek the following reliefs: “i). to call for the records relating to Exts.P1 to P9 and to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents 1 and 2 to give adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioners covered by Ext.P1 document and also protection for carrying out agricultural operations in the property through the workers engaged by the petitioners. ii). to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents 1 and 2 to register criminal case against the respondents 3 and 4 and their men and to prevent any kind of illegal action or law and order being taken by the respondents 3 and 4 and their people against the petitioners and their property.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioners is as follows:--Petitioners 1 and 2 are husband and wife. They purchased property in Ulloor village from the near relations of the 3rd respondent. A suit for partition and permanent prohibitory injunction was filed by the 3rd respondent. It is WPC No.3501 of 2010 -2- held that the plaintiffs therein who are the respondents 3 and 4 are not entitled for any share. There is an appeal. Pending appeal petitioners approached this Court for speedy disposal. The appeal was dismissed. Petitions for review and restoration were filed and the same were dismissed. It is stated that there is a false complaint for criminal trespass. That also ended in acquittal. Having failed in the civil suit, the 3rd respondent adopted a policy of abusing and threatening the petitioners with dire consequences if they are entering into the property. Petitioners approached this Court and obtained Ext.P5 judgment. Therein this Court held that the matter is purely a civil matter and the petitioners have to obtain injunction from the Civil Court. Further, there was a direction to maintain law and order and for protection of lives of petitioners and their family members. Petitioners filed civil suit before the Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The said Court passed a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction ordering that respondents 3 and 4 shall not trespass into the plaint schedule property and do such acts as stated in the decree. There is an appeal filed as A.S.No.77 of 2008 before WPC No.3501 of 2010 -3- the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The appellate Court has not stayed the decree, but, in spite of the said decree and direction of this Court it is stated that difficulties has been caused to the petitioners and their workers. 3. We heard Sri.T.M.Abdul Lathiff, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that having purchased the property and in view of the earlier judgments and as directed by this Court they have approached the Civil Court and obtained a decree, they should not be obstructed. He also submits that protection may be ordered for life of the petitioners. We notice that in Ext.P5 judgment a Division Bench of this Court had occasion to find at that stage that the matter is a pure civil matter to be decided. We also notice that the Court has already ordered that law and order be maintained and to see that civil Court orders are not violated and lives of the petitioners and their family members are not endangered. It is thereafter that the petitioners have approached the Civil Court and obtained a judgment (Ext.P6). The said judgment was obtained in 2008 and WPC No.3501 of 2010 -4- admittedly there is an appeal pending which is of the year 2008. In the circumstances of the case which we have narrated we do not think that it is necessary for us to entertain this writ petition. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to seek appropriate relief in the civil Court and in other forum, the writ petition is disposed of. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS