IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 31ST MAY 2011 / 10TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13935 of 2011(N) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SUMAYYA, D/O.JUMAILA BEEVI, SUMAYYA MANZIL, KANYAKULANGARA, MAZHUVADI MURI, NEDUMANGADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.D.KISHORE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUMANGADU POLICE STATION, NEDUMANGADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 541. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUMANGADU POLICE STATION, NEDUMANGADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 541. 3. MYDEEN PICHA, KALLUVARAMBU VEEDU, POOVATHUR, CHELLAMCODE MURI, NEDUMANGADU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 541. 4. LALLABEEVI, D/O.AWWA UMMAL, KALLUVARAMBU VEEDU, POOVATHUR, CHELLAMCODE MURI, NEDUMANGADU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 541. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. CHARISMA, R3 BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/05/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.13935/2011-N: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED DTD. 29/12/2007. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT DTD. 19/04/2011. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE DECREE IN O.S. 795/00. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 06/04/2010 IN I.A. 638/10 IN O.S. 95/10. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 21/04/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.2. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE PERMIT DTD. 02/05/2011 AND APPROVED PLAN ISSUED BY THE NEDUMANGADU MUNICIPALITY. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.13935 of 2011-N ***************************** Dated this the 31st day of May, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. This petition for police protection is filed by the petitioner claiming issue of directions under Art226 to respondents 1 and 2 to afford protection to the petitioner against the illegal obstruction caused by respondents 3 and 4 for the construction of a compound wall in compliance with Ext.P6 permit issued by the Nedumangadu Municipality. 2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the property covered by Ext.P1 document. The mother of the petitioner, the assignor in Ext.P1 was obliged to file a suit against third respondent herein and three others. Ext.P3 decree was passed restraining the third respondent and others from trespassing into the property in question. It is subsequently that Ext.P1 deed was executed. 3. According to the petitioner the present attempt of respondents 3 and 4 is to trespass into the property of the petitioner and widening the pathway. After Ext.P3 order was passed there was no disputes for some time. W.P(C) No.13935 of 2011-N 2 4. The petitioner obtained Ext.P6 permit on 02.05.2011. When she attempted to undertake the construction in accordance with Ext.P6, illegal obstructions are raised by respondents 3 and 4. The 4th respondent, suppressing Ext.P3 decree, had attempted to secure an order of injunction against the petitioner. That attempt has failed and the Munsiff's Court passed Ext.P4 order rejecting the prayer of the 4th respondent. 5. The petitioner complains that in spite of all these, there is attempt now on the part of respondents 3 and 4 to obstruct the work of construction of compound wall by the petitioner in accordance with Ext.P6. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that adequate safeguards and conditions have already been imposed in Ext.P6 permit that the width of the road should not be reduced etc. In these circumstances, respondents 3 and/or 4 have no right to cause any obstruction to the petitioner constructing the compound wall in accordance with Ext.P6. Ext.P3 read along with Ext.P6 entitles the petitioner to undertake the construction of the compound wall. Complaint to the police has not evoked any positive action and, in these circumstances, direction is prayed by the petitioner from this Court. W.P(C) No.13935 of 2011-N 3 6. Notice was ordered to all the respondents. Respondents 3 and 4, though served, have not chosen to enter appearance. The learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 submits that a complaint was received from the petitioner against illegal conduct of respondents 3 and 4. They were called to the police station and were warned against indulgence in any culpable acts. Adequate protection shall be given to the petitioner to construct the compound wall in accordance with Ext.P3 decree and Ext.P6 permit. The petitioner must strictly comply with the conditions in Ext.P6 permit, submits the learned Government Pleader. 7. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, we feel that the petitioner is entitled to an order of protection as prayed for. But it will have to be zealously ensured by the petitioner that such construction is strictly in accordance with the stipulations in Ext.P6. In the absence of any objections raised by respondents 3 and 4 before this Court and in the light of Exts.P3 and P4 order, we are satisfied that this petition can be allowed. W.P(C) No.13935 of 2011-N 4 8. In the result: a) This Writ Petition is allowed; b) Respondents 1 and 2 are directed to afford adequate and sufficient police protection for the petitioner to construct the compound wall strictly in accordance with the terms of Ext.P6 against any obstruction that may be raised by respondents 3 and 4. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/