IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH MARCH 2008 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 8255 of 2008(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SREEKRISHNAN ,S/O.ARU, PATHIKATTU CHALLA PATTANCHERRY, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLANKODE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. UMMER ALI,S/O. MAJEED, ATTAYAMPATHY, MUTHAMADA, NO.1 VILLAGE, MEENKARA P.O., CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY SMT.A.PREMAKUMARI G.P.SRI. BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC.NO.8255/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER's EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNY EXECUTED BY SRI. PANKUNNY IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD 10.1.2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R1. /TRUE COPY/ cl K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N. RAVINDRAN, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.8255 OF 2008-G -------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J: The petitioner submits, he has been authorised by one Mr. Pankunny to conduct certain cases on his behalf by executing Ext.P1 power of attorney. The petitioner further claims, the said power of attorney enables him to manage the properties also. The disputed property was purchased by the mother of Mr. Pankunny in an auction sale. On the strength of the power of attorney, the petitioner went to the property. The 3rd respondent threatened him. It is alleged that the said person told him that if he comes to the property, what is going to be taken to his house will be his corpse. Feeling aggrieved by the stand of the 3rd respondent, the petitioner preferred Ext.P2 representation before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Alathur, seeking protection to his life. Thereafter, this writ petition is filed. 2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that for the last two years nobody has entered into the disputed WPC.NO.8255/08 . 2 property. There is no law and order problem warranting intervention of the police. 3. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit contending that the property involved in the dispute was part of his wife's family property and in a partition suit, it was alloted to his wife's father and on death of her father, it was inherited by his wife and other legal heirs. Now, his wife has filed a suit against Mr. Pankunny and the civil court has passed Ext.R3(1) order restraining Mr. Pankunny from alienating that property. The 3rd respondent also denies all the allegations raised by the petitioner. Having regard to the facts disclosed, we feel that this is not a fit case where this Court should issue any direction in favour of the petitioner. It appears, police protection is sought to get over the order in the civil suit against Mr. Pankunny. The same cannot be permitted. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner and his right to move other forums for appropriate reliefs. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. cl WPC.NO.8255/08 . 3