IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2010 / 21ST SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 25280 of 2010(H) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SHAILAJA,D/O.KRISHNAMMA,ASWATHY BHAVAN, ARUMANOOR DESOM,THIRUPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.M.HEMALATHA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL),S.P.OFFICE,KURAVANKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695121. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION,NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695121. 4. P.RAJU,VARIKKASSERI MELETHATTU VEEDU, KIDAYARAKONAM,VENPAKAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695123. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.25280 of 2010-H ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 12th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner has obtained Ext.P1 judgment restraining the 4th respondent by way of prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and committing waste therein. 2. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “a. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider and dispose of Exhibit P2 representation and accordingly afford protection to the life and property of the petitioner. b. to direct the 4th respondent to obey Exhibit P1 judgment and not to cause any obstruction or nuisance to the petitioner or her property.” 3. We feel that in the nature of the case petitioner has got an alternate remedy and she can approach the Court seeking appropriate relief against the 4th WPC No.25280/2010 -2- respondent. However, we direct that, in case the petitioner complains of commission of any cognizable offence by the 4th respondent before the 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent shall take effective action on the same in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS