IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 30TH APRIL 2010 / 10TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 13884 of 2010(I) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ A.R.VIKRAMAN PILLAI, S/O.LATE S.RAGAVAN PILLAI,AGED 50 YEARS, IYKARA SREELAGHAM,AYIROOR. BY ADV. SRI.ARUN.B.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOIPURAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. SADHASIVAN @ SIVAN,PUTHENVEEDU, KOTTATHUR, AYIROOR,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 4. GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI, PUTHENVEEDU, KOTTATHUR, AYIROOR,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 5. SARALA,W/O.SADHASIVAN,PUTHENVEEDU, KOTTATHUR, AYIROOR,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. M.R. SABU R3 TOR5 BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.13884/2010 I APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 17/04/10 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 21/04/10 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.571/CAMP/2010/SPPTA DTD. 22/04/2010. P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 24/04/2010 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R3A: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD. 18/12/2008 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER. R3B: COPY OF COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO:13884 OF 2010 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th April, 2010. JUDGMENT SURENDRA MOHAN, J. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking police protection for his life and the lives of his family members. 2. According to the petitioner he was conducting business in timber. At present he is preparing to start the business of running a crusher unit. Respondents 4 and 5 are his relatives. The third respondent is the husband of the fifth respondent. The petitioner had borrowed some amount from the fifth respondent and he alleges that he was forced to sign a stamp paper of the value of Rs.50/-. According to the petitioner he had repaid the borrowed amount in the year 2008. While so, the petitioner's business suffered heavy losses. Respondents 3 to 5 then demanded payment of the money again with interest. The petitioner has alleged that on 17/4/2010, respondents 3 to 5 along with some local politicians trespassed into the house of the petitioner and caused damage to his house. Thereafter, they started staying in the car porch of the petitioner's house. It is the further allegation of the petitioner that WPC 13884/2010 2 the third and fourth respondents are active supporters of the ruling party, CPI(M). Respondents 3 to 5 along with their henchmen obstructed the free ingress and egress to and from the petitioner's house. Though complaints were submitted to the second respondent, he failed to take any action in the matter. The complaint made to the first respondent also could not produce any favourable action. Therefore, he has approached this Court praying for the issue of appropriate directions to respondents 1 and 2 for protection of his life and property. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 3 to 5. According to the third respondent who has sworn to the affidavit, the petitioner is a relative of his. He had borrowed an amount of Rs.5.75 lakhs during the time of financial crisis. The amount was paid by the fifth respondent out of money kept for the construction of their house. Part of the amount was raised by pledging the gold ornaments of the fifth respondent. However, the petitioner did not return the amount within the time stipulated. Therefore, mediations were conducted in the presence of the panchayath ward members. After mediation talks Ext.R3A WPC 13884/2010 3 agreement was executed by the petitioner in favour of the fifth respondent undertaking to pay the said amount of Rs.5.75 lakhs with interest, within a period of six months therefrom. However, the said amount has not been repaid till date. According to the third respondent, the gold ornaments that were pledged for raising the said amount are put to sale by the bankers. Therefore, respondents 3 to 5 had approached the petitioner for getting the amount. However, the petitioner abused and manhandled them including the fifth respondent who is a lady. According to respondents 3 to 5 the complaints filed against them by the petitioner are all false. Therefore, they have denied the allegation of the petitioner that they had trespassed the petitioner's house and stayed in his car porch. They have also denied the allegation that they had obstructed the free ingress and egress to and from the house. They have also never threatened the family members of the petitioner. They have also denied the allegations regarding their affinity to the ruling party, CPI(M). According to respondents 3 to 5, they had neither caused any threat to the petitioner or his family members nor caused damage to his house as alleged. They WPC 13884/2010 4 have also not stayed in the car porch of his house. 4. In the nature of the submissions contained in the counter affidavit as well as the documents produced, it is clear that the dispute in the present case is essentially a civil dispute. The disputes between the petitioner and respondents 3 to 5 are better adjudicated and settled in a properly framed civil suit. Since respondents 3 to 5 have unequivocally stated in their counter affidavit that they have not committed any of the acts complained of by the petitioner, we do not think it necessary to pass any orders in this writ petition as prayed for by the petitioner. The parties can settle their grievances by instituting appropriate proceedings before the Civil Court. 5. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to look into and to take appropriate action in accordance with law on any complaints that may be made by the petitioner regarding any threat to the life of himself or his family members in future. If it is found that there is any such threat subsisting, appropriate action shall be taken to provide necessary protection to the life of the petitioner and his WPC 13884/2010 5 family members. Respondents 3 to 5 can approach a civil court for appropriate reliefs, if any amount is due from the petitioner to them, as alleged. This writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. --------------------------------------- L.A.A.NO: --------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: