IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 21ST MARCH 2011 / 30TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 8746 of 2011(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. KHALID KUNJU, S/O.ALIKUNJU, VANIYANTHEYYATH, THAZHAVA P.O., PULIYUR, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. RAJEENA, D/O.KHALID KUNJU. BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMMED SRI.K.I.SAGEER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 3. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 4. PONNAPPAN, AGED 52, S/O.DIVAKARAN, THARAYIL THEKKETHIL HOUSE, THODIYOOR NORTH P.O., THODIYOOR VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 5. OMANA, AGED 42, W/O.PONNAPPAN, -DO- 6. ANEESH, AGED 22, S/O.PONNAPPAN, -DO- 7. ATHUL, AGED 18 YEARS, S/O.PONNAPPAN, -DO- BY SRI. V.P. VIPINDAS, GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1,R2 & R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jma R.BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO:8746 OF 2011 P ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st March, 2011. JUDGMENT Basant, J. Petitioners are a father and daughter who claim to have purchased 103 cents of property. According to them when they were trying to construct a compound wall for their property respondents 4 to 7 all local neighbours are raising objections. All of them belong to the same family. They are having property adjacent to the property purchased by the petitioners. According to the petitioners, respondents 4 to 7, local neighbours have no right to obstruct the construction of the compound wall by the petitioners. It is in these circumstances that the petitioners have come to this Court with this petition for issue of directions under Art.226 to respondents 1 to 3. 2. Obviously there is a dispute between the petitioners on the one hand and respondents 4 to 7 on the other about the right of the petitioners to construct a compound wall for their property purchased by them. That dispute between them, we are of the opinion has to be resolved by resort to appropriate civil judicial WPC 8746/2011 2 proceedings. Police cannot be expected to settle such a dispute between the parties. Invoking our jurisdiction under Art.226 we are not persuaded to agree that such a dispute between the parties can be resolved by us. We find no reason for the petitioners to short circuit the proceedings and approach this Court with this petition under Art.226. If there is illegal obstruction against the right of the petitioners to construct compound wall and gate for the property purchased by them, they must certainly approach civil court to get their right established. We are not persuaded to issue any directions under Art.226 to enable the petitioners to put up such compound wall and gate notwithstanding the objections of respondents 4 to 7. 3. With the above observations this writ petition is dismissed in limine. R.BASANT Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 8746/2011 3