IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2011 / 17TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 553 of 2011(T) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. A.T.JOHN, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O.LATE TITUS, PULIKOOTUNGAL HOUSE, KADAMANITTA P.O., NARANGANAM,PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. ACHAMMA JOHN, AGED 65 YEARS, PULIKOOTUNGAL HOUSE, KADAMANITTA P.O., NARANGANAM, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEWS RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE C.I. OF POLICE, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 645. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 645. 3. V.A.KARUNAKARAN, VATTOON HOUSE, KADAMANITTA P.O., NARANGANAM, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 649. 4. MANUKUMAR, VAZHITHANATHU HOUSE, KADAMANITTA P.O., NARANGANAM, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 649. 5. MAHESH KUMAR, VAZHITHANATHU HOUSE, KADAMANITTA P.O., NARANGANAM, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 649. 6. SIVANKUTTY, VATTOON MEMURIYIL HOUSE, KADAMANITTA P.O., NARANGANAM, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 649. 7. ABRAHAM @ PODYKUTTY, CHERUKAVIL VATTOON HOUSE, KADAMANITTA P.O., NARANGANAM, PIN-689 649. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.K.VIPIN DAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R.BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 553 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th January, 2011. JUDGMENT Basant, J. Petitioners have come to this Court with this petition for issue of directions under Art.226 of the Constitution to respondents 1 and 2 to afford police protection to them. According to the petitioners they have secured decree from a Civil Court which has become final. Decree prohibits the party respondents from trespassing into the suit property which belongs to the petitioners and others. The petitioners want to put up/rebuilt a compound wall (kayyala) on one boundary of the suit property. That is being opposed by the party respondents. For this police protection is claimed. 2. We are afraid the petitioners have come to wrong forum. The petitioners have to approach the court for execution of the decree if there is any hindrance/obstruction notwithstanding the decree against exercise of lawful acts of possession by the Court. If this Court were to direct police protection the police would become the arbiter as to where the boundary wall is to put WPC 553/2011 2 up. That obviously cannot be permitted. Learned counsel for the petitioners himself fairly submits that earlier an application was filed before the execution court to execute the decree and that the said petition was not pursued consequent to the assurance given by the respondents, that they shall not raise any objections. If they still raise objections it is certainly for the petitioners to approach the execution court. 3. With the above observations this writ petition is dismissed. R.BASANT Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 553/2011 3