IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2011 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 6707 of 2011(K) ------------------------ PETITIONER : --------------------- SATHEESAN, VAZHAKUTTAM VEEDU, AMRITAPURI, PARAYAKADAVU, ALAPPAD VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.B.S.SWATHI KUMAR SMT.ANITHA RAVINDRAN SMT.S.MEERA SMT.M.G.AISHWARYA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 690518. 2. PURNNAMIRATYANDAPURI, SECRETARY, MATA AMRITHANANDAMAYI MADOM, AMRITAPURI, PARAYAKADAVU, ALAPPAD VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT-680641. 3. RAJU, ASHRAM INMATE, RESIDING AT MATA AMRITHANANDAMAYI MADOM, AMRITAPURI, PARAYAKADAVU, ALAPPAD VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK KOLLAM DISTRICT-680641. 4. MATHRYADAS, ASHRAM INMATE RESIDING AT MATA AMRITHANDAMAYI MADOM,AMRITAPURI, PARAYAKADAVU, ALAPPAD VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK KOLLAM DISTRICT-680641. 5. MAHADEVAN, ASHRAM INMATE RESIDING AT MATA AMRITHANDAMAYI MADOM, AMRITAPURI, PARAYAKADAVU, ALAPPAD VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK KOLLAM DISTRICT-680641. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. C.M. CHARISMA R2 BY ADVS. SRI.K.SRIKUMAR SRI.P.R.AJITHKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 6707 of 2011(K) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 21-2-2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn R.BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO:6707 OF 2011 K ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th March, 2011. JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court claiming issue of directions under Art.226 to the first respondent to afford protection to the life and person of the petitioner and his family members against alleged illegal, culpable and violent acts of respondents 2 to 5. 2. According to the petitioner he is the owner in possession of an extent of property. Respondents 2 to 5 represent the Mata Amrithandamayi Madom. The said Madom has purchased property adjacent to the property of the petitioner. Boundary disputes are there between the petitioner on the one hand and the Madom on the other. Both the petitioner and the Madom have already approached the civil court. Disputes are pending. Civil court is already seized of the matter. Petitioner has no grievance to raise about the property dispute between the petitioner and the representatives of the Madom. WPC 6707/2011 2 3. Why then has he come to court? The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representatives of the Madom are vexing and harassing the petitioner. They are indulging in contumacious, culpable and violent acts in their attempt to brove beat the petitioner and compel him to surrender to their dictater. It is in these circumstances prayed that directions under Art.226 may be issued to afford protection to the life and person of the petitioner. Property dispute shall be taken care of in the proceedings before the civil court but the life of the petitioner may be protected it is prayed. 4. Respondent 2 to 5 have entered appearance through counsel. Respondents 2 to 5 deny all allegations raised against them. It is true that there is a civil dispute between the parties. Parties are already before the civil court. Respondents 2 to 5 shall scrupulously abide by the decisions of the civil court on the subject of the dispute. They have no intention in any way to cause any harassment or vexation to the petitioner. They shall not indulge in any such contumacious or culpable conduct. The WPC 6707/2011 3 attempt of the petitioner is only to steal a march over respondents 2 to 5 in the civil dispute between them. The categoric submission/undertaking of respondents 2 to 5 may be recorded that they shall not indulge in any contumacious act against the petitioner to compel him to settle the civil dispute. No directions in these circumstances are liable to be issued under Art.226 against respondents 2 to 5 submits the learned counsel. 5. The learned Govt. Pleader after taking instruction from the first respondent submits that it is true that there is a civil dispute between the parties. Parties are already before the civil court. According to the first respondent in his perception there is absolutely no threat to the life or person of the petitioner. If there be any threat petitioner can complain and necessary action shall be taken by the police. At the moment there is no reason to perceive any such threat. In these circumstances no specific directions are necessary submits the learned Govt. Pleader. WPC 6707/2011 4 6. We have considered all the relevant inputs. We record the submission made on behalf of respondents 2 to 5. We record the submissions of the learned Govt. Pleader. We are in these circumstances satisfied that no specific directions are necessary in the matter under Art.226 of the Constitution. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed with the above observations. R.BASANT Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 6707/2011 5