IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2008 / 27TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 23655 of 2008(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. K.VENUKUMAR, AGED 38, S/O.P.KRISHNAPILLA ,ROHINI PADMA BUILDING, VATTAPPARA PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ADV.A.SARO, W/O.K.VENUKUMAR, DO. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SMT.K.M.RAMYA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA TO BE REP. BY SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VATTAPPARA POLICE STATION, VATTAPPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-28. 3. A.K.PADMAKUMAR, S/O.P.KRISHNAPILLA, SINDHU BHAVAN, NEAR RATION SHOP, DOORA DARSHAN ROAD, POOMALLIYOOR KONAM JN, PERURKADA PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SHRI BENJAMIN PAUL FOR R1 & R2 ADV. SRI.BIJU BALAKRISHNAN FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.23655/08 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)No.7293/07 DATED 19.6.07. EXT.P2: PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)No. 12721/08 DATED 27.5.08. EXT.P3: PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 30.7.08. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.3565/04 DATED 16.12.2004. RESPONDENTS' EXTS: EXT.R3(a): PHOTOSTATE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.2185/03 OF KARAKULAM SUB REGISTRY. EXT.R3(b): PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.4616 DATED 25.9.03. EXT.R3(c): PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 25.11.2004 UNDER Section 13(2) OF THE SRFAESI (SECOND) ORDINANCE, 2002, ISSUED BY THE SUNDICATE BANK, HOUSING FINANCE BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.R3(d): PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 7.1.2004 ISSUED BY THE KARAKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXTR3(e): PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE CAVEAT OP.97/08 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, NEDUMANGAD. EXT.R3(f): PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE CAVEAT O.P.NO.42/08 BEFORE THE SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD. EXT.R3(g): PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.No.545/08 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, NEDUMANGAD. TRUE COPY K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.23655 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 18th DAY OF AUGUST, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioners are husband and wife. They purchased a property from the 3rd respondent as per Exhibit P4 document. It is the second floor of a three storied building. They are in possession of that building. While so, the 3rd respondent came to the building on 13.7.2008. He tried to break open the lock of the said building. When it was resisted by the second petitioner, he caught hold of her hair and threatened her. Though the matter was reported to the police, they did not take any action. The 3rd respondent is continuing his threat against the life of the petitioners. In the above background, this Writ Petition is filed seeking appropriate reliefs. 2. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit in which it is submitted that he was indebted to the Kerala State Financial Enterprises. When steps were taken by the KSFE to recover the amount, as part of family arrangement, the property covered by Exhibit P4 was assigned in favour of the petitioners. But, the 3rd respondent asserts he always retained possession of the W.P.(C)No.23655/08 -2- said property and petitioners were never put in possession. The petitioners have already moved the civil court seeking an injunction against the 3rd respondent. It is posted for return of summons on 21.8.2008. Though an application for interim relief was moved, no order was passed by the Munsiff Court. Apparently, an ad interim order was not granted because the 3rd respondent has also filed a caveat petition. 3. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that it is a family dispute and therefore the police did not interfere in the matter. 4. From the pleadings and materials produced in this Writ Petition, we find that there is threat to the life of the petitioners only when they go to the disputed property. If they go around attending their normal avocation, there is no threat from the part of the 3rd respondent. In this proceedings, we can ask the police to grant protection, if only the police is competent to decide who is in possession and protect the person who is found to be in possession. But under our legal system, the police is not conferred with any such power. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioners cannot be granted. But, we record the submission of the 3rd respondent that he has no W.P.(C)No.23655/08 -3- intention whatsoever to harm the petitioners when they go around attending their normal avocation. The dispute arises only when they come to occupy the disputed property covered by Exhibit P4. Recording the above submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn