IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2011 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 16915 of 2009(H) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- SHAJAHABU, RESIDING AT SHAMLA MANZIL, EDAMON KARA, EDAMON VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. FR.JOHNY THOTTAM SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THENMALA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. 4. SURESH @ BAVA, PODIMANNIL VEEDU, EDAMON, EDAMON VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 5. BADARUDEEN, PODIMANNIL MELATHIL VEEDU, EAMON MURI AND MURI AND VILLATE PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 6. JESSY STEPHEN, W/O.STEPHEN, JUSTINE COTTAGE, EAMON MURI AND MURI AND VILLAGE PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 7. EBRAHIM KUTTY, SUMAYA MANZIL, EAMON MURI AND MURI AND VILLAGE PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, tss W.P.(C) NO.16915/2009 8. LALU , PODIMANNIL VEETTIL, EAMON MURI, AND MURI AND VILLAGE PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 9. PODIMON, PODIMANNIL MELATHIL VEEDU, EAMON MURI AND MURI AND VILLAGE PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPIN DAS. R4 TO R9 BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C0 NO.16915/2009 W.P.(C) NO. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 22.05.2009 IN IA. 323/2009 IN OS. 65/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, PUNALUR. P2:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 8.5.2009 IN WPC. 12739/2009 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 31.8.2002 IN OS. 211/2002 ON THE FILE OF MUNSIFF COURT, PUNALUR. P4:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 9.2.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 30.3.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5(a):- COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.829/PTM/PSD/09 DTD. 30.3.2009. P6:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 16.6.2009. P7:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS. NO.65/2009 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, PUNALUR DTD. 4.1.2011. P8:- COPY OF THE CAVEAT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUB COURT, KOTTARAKKARA CAVEAT OP. NO.11/2011. P9:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THENMALA POLICE STATION DTD. 4.8.09. P9(a):- COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.367/09 DTD. 4.8.09 ISSEUD BY THE THENMALA POLCIE STATION DTD. 4.8.09. P10:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KULATHUPUZHA POLICE STATION DTD. 10.3.2009. P11:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETTIONER BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THENMALA POLICE STATION DTD. 15.1.2011. P12:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THENMALA POLICE STATION DTD. 10.3.2011. P12(a):- COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.110/PTXI/D/11-12 DT. 12.3.2011 ISSUED BY THE THENMALA POLICE STATION. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.16915 of 2009-H ***************************** Dated this the 16th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 1 to 3 to afford protection to the petitioner to complete the construction of a compound wall on the boundary of his property against illegal obstruction raised by respondents 3 to 9. 2. According to the petitioner, he is the absolute owner of the property and there is no right for anyone to walk through his property. Respondents 4 to 9 are not having any property disputes with the petitioner. But they are claiming a right to walk through the petitioner's property. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court with this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. 3. This petition was filed as early as on 17.06.2009. No interim orders have been passed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that subsequently Ext.P1 order has been passed in favour of the petitioner upholding his claim for W.P(C) No.16915 of 2009-H 2 injunction against respondents 4 to 7 herein. In spite of the decree, respondents 4 to 9 are raising unjustified obstruction, it is submitted. 4. Has Ext.P1 order become final ? Admittedly an appeal has been preferred by the contesting respondents and the appeal is pending before the appellate court. No interim orders have been passed in the appeal, it is submitted. 5. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions submits that the parties are before the civil court and it is for the parties to secure appropriate orders from the civil court. If the petitioner wants to complete construction of his compound wall, he may be directed to seek appropriate orders from the civil court. Effect shall be given to the orders of the civil court subject to the direction of the civil court, submits the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. 6. The dispute is about the construction of a compound wall. Parties are already before the civil court. Though the civil court has passed Ext.P1 order in favour of the petitioner, it has not now become final. The matter is pending before the appellate court. Respondents 4 to 9, though served, are not represented before us when we took up the matter for hearing W.P(C) No.16915 of 2009-H 3 and disposal. But it is accepted that an appeal is pending before the appellate court against Ext.P1 order. 7. We are not, in these circumstances, persuaded to agree that any directions under Article 226 of the Constitution can, need or deserve to be issued now. The petitioner must seek appropriate orders from the civil court. It is not necessary to issue any directions under Article 226 of the Constitution now in the matter pending before the civil court. 8. This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with the above specific observations. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/