IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32973 of 2010(V) ------------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------------- A.T.SIVAN,S/O.THAI,MANDOTHIPARAMBIL HOUSE,CEPZ,THUTHIYOOR,KAKKANAD. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY SRI.G.HARIKRISHNAN (TRIPUNITHURA) SRI.MAHESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOF OF POLICE, KAKKANAD POLICE STATION, KAKKANAD,PIN 682 030. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAKKANAD POLICE STATION, KAKKANAD,PIN 682 030. 3. A.T.RAJAPPAN,S/O.THAI,MANDOTHIPARAMBIL HOUSE,CEPZ,THUTHIYOOR,KAKKANAD, PIN 682 030. 4. BENNY,C/O.A.T.RAJAPPAN,DO. DO. 5. VIJA,W/O.BENNY, DO. DO. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI ALEX M. THOMBRA. ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO FOR R3 TO 5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).NO.32973 OF 2010 V PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPYOF REGISTERED WILL NO.15/1977, EDAPPALLY SRO. EXT.P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF A SURVEY SKETCH OF THE PROPERTY IN RE-SURVEY NO.530/2, BLOCK 9 OF KAKKANAD VILLAGE. EXT.P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PLAINT FILED IN OS.NO.584/2010 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P4 TRUE PHOTCOPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OS.NO.584/2010, OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPORT OF ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, MISS YAMUNA P., DATED 18TH JUNE, 2010. REPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R5(A) TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE DITCH MADE IN THE PATHWAY BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.R5(B) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 18.10.2010 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. //True copy// PS to Judge K.M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO. 32973 OF 2010 V ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 16th November, 2010. JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. The prayer in the Writ Petition is as follows: “Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing respondents 1 and 2 not to interfere in the civil dispute between the petitioner and respondents 3 to 5 with regard to the pathway claimed by them through the property of the petitioner and not to harass or threaten the petitioner in any manner in this connection.” 2. Learned Government Pleader would submit that the complaint of the petitioner is that police is interfering in a civil dispute. He further submits that a complaint is received from the fifth respondent (Ext.R5(b)) that the petitioner has committed mischief in the pathway. It was enquired into and on enquiry, it is WP(C).NO.32973/2010 V 2 found that one of the relatives of the petitioner has rectified the mischief and it is submitted that the matter can be treated as closed and there will be no harassment. We make it clear that the official respondents shall not interfere in the civil dispute between the petitioner and the party respondents. We also leave it open to the petitioner, if he is so advised, to take up any complaint he may have against the police authorities before the competent Forum. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. //True copy// PS to Judge WP(C).NO.32973/2010 V 3