1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.11.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.(MD)No.476 of 2011 A.Chellathurai : Petitioner vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram. 2.The Inspector of Police, R.S.Mangalam Police Station, R.S.Mangalam, Ramanathapuram District. 3.K.Manickam 4.M.Kaliammal [R-4 impleaded as per order of this Court dated 01.11.2011 made in M.P.(MD)No.1/2011] : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent not to interfere with the civil rights of the petitioner with regard to the property in Survey No.463/15 measuring an extent of 1½ cents in Karungkalathur Village of Thiruvadania Taluk under the guise of enquiry when the civil suit in O.S.No.25 of 2006 is pending disposal before the District Munsif Court, Thiruvadanai. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu For Respondents 1&2 : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen Additional Government Pleader For Respondent No.3 : Dismissed For Respondent No.4 : Mr.R.Sundar Srinivasan ORDER ******* The petitioner, claiming to be the owner of the property in Survey No.463/15 measuring to an extent of 1½ cents in Karungkalathur Village, Thiruvadanai Taluk, has filed the present Writ Petition seeking for a direction to the second respondent, Inspector of Police, R.S.Mangalam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District, not to interfere with the civil rights of the petitioner with reference to the said property under the guise of enquiry, when the civil suit in O.S.No.25 of 2006 is pending disposal before the District Munsif Court, Thiruvadanai. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 2. When the matter came up on 12.01.2011, this Court ordered notice to the respondents. As against the third respondent, the Writ Petition was dismissed for want of completion of the process. Subsequent to the notice, the fourth respondent-M.Kaliammal, who is the wife of the third respondent herein, has filed an application in M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 to implead her as party-respondent to the Writ Petition and the said application was allowed by this Court on 01.11.2011. In the affidavit filed in support of the application for impleadment, she has stated that the suit in O.S.No.25 of 2006 was already withdrawn by the petitioner on 08.08.2008 and this fact was not brought to the notice of this Court and the petitioner is guilty of suppressing information. The learned counsel for the petitioner has no explanation for not furnishing the details regarding the withdrawal of the suit, especially when that has been made as a basis for claiming relief. 3. The second respondent has also filed a counter- affidavit dated 21.01.2011. In the counter-affidavit, it is claimed that the allegation made by the petitioner that the second respondent had asked the petitioner and his brother to appear for enquiry was denied and also the allegation that he obtained a false complaint from the third respondent was also denied. It is stated that Crime No.171 of 2010 was registered under Sections 341, 294(b) and 506(II) of the Indian Penal Code and since the ingredients of the said offence have been made out in the complaint, the second respondent, who is the Station House Officer, is bound to investigate the complaint. 4. In the light of the above said facts, the prayer made by the petitioner cannot be countenanced by this Court. Hence, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram. 2.The Inspector of Police, R.S.Mangalam Police Station, R.S.Mangalam, Ramanathapuram District +One cc to Mr.R.Sundar Srinivasan, Advocate, SR.No.38883 +One Cc to The Spl Govt Pleader, SR.No.38510 SML rl/5 c- 23.11.2011 Order made in W.P.(MD)No.476 of 2011 Dated:- 08.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/