IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 14TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 25TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 2377 of 2008(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ ARUNDHATHI, D/O. CHACKY, THOIDIYIL VEEDU, VAKKOM, KADAKKAVOOR, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.SIBY MATHEW SRI.A.A.MOHAMMED NAZIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAVOOR. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAVOOR. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ATTINGAL. 4. C.V.BALACHANDRAN, S/O. VISWANATHAN, MADHAVI MANDIRAM, VAKKOM, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.VAKKOM N.VIJAYAN GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.A.SALIM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 2377/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 30.10.2007 IN O.S. NO.241/2004 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, VARKALA. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN A.S. 6/08 FILED BEFORE THE SUB COURT, ATTINGAL. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION AND THE NOTICE TO FIX A DAY FOR HEARING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 15.1.2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.2377 OF 2008-G ----------------------------------------- Dated 14th February, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. There was a civil dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent. By Ext.P1 judgment of the Munsiff's Court in O.S. No.241/2004 filed by the petitioner, her prayer was rejected and the counter claim raised by the 4th respondent was allowed. The aggrieved petitioner preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the Sub Court, Attingal. She has also preferred Ext.P3 stay petition along with the appeal. The said appeal and the petition are posted to 2.4.2008. While so, the petitioner submits, she is being pressurised by respondents 1 and 2 to transfer the property, which was the subject-matter of the dispute, to the 4th respondent. Aggrieved by that she has preferred Ext.P4 representation before the 3rd respondent Deputy Superintendent of Police, Attingal and thereafter, this writ petition is filed, complaining against police harassment. 2. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit, denying the WPC 2377/2008 2 allegations against him. He submits, he has never approached the police to interfere in the civil dispute between him and the petitioner. 3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that both the parties filed complaints before the police and the police only enquired into the matter. The allegation raised by the petitioner is denied by the police. 4. The dispute between the parties is a civil dispute, in which the police need interfere, if only appropriate directions are issued by the concerned civil court. We record the submission of the learned Government Pleader that the police have no intention to harass the petitioner. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. Nm/