IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARILAL FRIDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2011 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 33675 of 2011(H) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------- ANOOP P, S/O.PRABHAKARAN, AGED 2O YEARS, SREEVALSAM, KOLAKOZHIKOLUMBIL, KAVASSERY, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABY MATHEW RESPONDENTS : ----------------------- 1. DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, PALAKKAD - 678 001. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT- 678 541. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALATHUR POLICE STATION, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 541. 4. N.SHANMUGHAN, S/O.NACHIMUTHU, AGED 45 YEARS, UDHAYANCHAL HOUSE, SIVANCOVIL ROAD, THATHAMANGALAM P.O, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST - 678 542. 5. SULAIMAN, S/O.MUHAMMAD, AGED 45 YEARS, PINCHUCIL, KUNDUKAD, KIZHAKKENCHERY, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST - 678 541. 6. ABDULLA, S/O.MOIDU MOLLA, AGED 62 YEAR, PUNNAPADAM, KIZHAKKENCHERRY, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST - 678 541. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: RKM -2- WP(C).No. 33675 of 2011(H) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : P1 : COPY OF THE PLAINT DATED 21-10-2011 IN O.S. 262/2011. P2 : COPY OF THE PETITION IN IA 1235/2011 DATED 21-10-2011. P3 : COPY OF ORDER IA 1235/11 DATED 21-10-2011. P4 : COPY OF THE COMMISSIONERS REPORT DATED 05-11-2011. P5 : COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT DATED 04-11-2011. P6 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 1/11/2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE RKM PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & K.HARILAL, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C) NO. 33675 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The petitioner,who is aged only 20 years, has filed this writ petition seeking protection for his life as well as for peaceful residence to his mother and grandmother in a house situated in 5 and 1/4 cents of land at Kolakozhikolumbil in Palakkad District. According to the petitioner, the property belongs to him, his mother and grand mother. For raising the money necessary for giving treatment to his grandmother, who is seriously ill, the petitioner had to avail a loan of Rs. 5 Lakhs from the 4th respondent. As a security for the above loan, they became compelled to execute a deed of sale. Notwithstanding the sale, the petitioner, his mother and grand mother continues to reside in the building. When there was an attempt by the 4th respondent and respondents 5 and 6, who are his aides, to forcefully evict the petitioner from the house, the petitioner approached the Alathur Munsiff Court and filed Ext.P1 suit. In W.P.(C) No. 33675 /2011 2 Ext.P1, the learned Munsiff has passed an order of interim injunction restraining the respondents from forcefully evicting the petitioner from the said house. In spite of the currency of the injunction order, the party respondents are even now coming to the petitioner's house every now and then and threatening them and trying to evict them forcefully. The petitioner further submits that apart from the threat of eviction, the party respondents are threatening the petitioner and members of his family with danger to the life and limbs. 3. On this writ petition coming up for admission Sri.Dhanesh Mathew Manjooran learned Government Pleader has taken notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and we have heard him also. 4. Having considered the averments in the writ petition and the various materials placed on record and the submissions of Sri.Baby Mathew learned counsel for the petitioner and those addressed by Sri.Dhanesh Mathew Manjooran learned Government Pleader, we are of the view that protection ,which the petitioner has sought for as regards the continued residence in the house, has already been granted to him by the learned Munsiff, Alathur. It is open to the petitioner to move the learned W.P.(C) No. 33675 /2011 3 Munsiff for initiation of proceedings under Order 39 Rule 2A. If the petitioner has a grievance that the order of injunction is being violated, it is open to the petitioner to seek enforcement of the injunction order and for that purpose seek rendition of police assistance. All these reliefs should be applied for and obtained from the learned Munsiff himself. 5. Coming to the allegation that there is subsisting threat to the lives and limbs of the petitioner and his family members from the part of the party respondents, we feel that it is not necessary that we take a decision as to the correctness of the above allegation. Ext.P6 petition has been submitted by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent. the 2nd respondent is directed to conduct an immediate enquiry into Ext.P6 either directly or through the 3rd respondent. As part of the enquiry, the officer conducting the enquiry is free to summon or meet respondents 4 to 6 . If the enquiry reveals that there is subsisting threat to the life and limbs of the petitioner, his grandmother and mother from the part of respondents 4 to 6, the officer conducting the enquiry shall take such steps as are necessary for protecting the life and limbs of the petitioner, his mother and grand mother. We W.P.(C) No. 33675 /2011 4 make it clear that all issues pertaining to the building in question should allowed to be resolved by the learned Munsiff himself. The petitioner is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the 4th respondent by registered post acknowledgment due as soon as he gets the same. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE K.HARILAL, JUDGE. dpk W.P.(C) No. 33675 /2011 5