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 11TH JANUARY 2008 / 21ST POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1488 of 2008(B) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. JOSE JOSEPH, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.OUSEPH, KOZHUPPAKKALAM HOUSE, CHANGAMKARI MURI, EDATHUA VILLAGE. 2. SHALET JOSE, 28 YEARS, D/O.JOSE JOSEPH, KOZHUPPAKKALAM HOUSE, CHANGAMKARI MURI, EDATHUA VILLAGE. 3. VARGHESE JOSEPH @ JIMMICHAN, S/O.ZACHARIA, KOZHUPPAKKALAM HOUSE, CHANGAMKARI MURI, EDATHUA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SMT.C.G.BINDU SMT.C.G.AJITHA SMT.D.SARITHA SMT.M.K.RAJITHA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EDATHUA. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EDATHUA. 3. CICILY, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O.EAPEN, KOZHUPPAKKALAM HOUSE, CHANGAMKARA MURI, EDATHUA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DIST. 4. EAPEN, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.OUSEPH, COMPANY EMPLOYEE OF KOZHUPPAKKALAM HOUSE, CHANGAMKARI MURI, EDATHUA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY G.P.SRI. SALIM P.A THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N. RAVINDRAN, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.1488 OF 2008-B -------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J: First petitioner is the brother of the 4th respondent. 2nd petitioner is the 1st petitioner's daughter and 3rd petitioner is 2nd petitioner's husband. 3rd respondent is the wife of the 4th respondent. The 1st petitioner submits, there is a public pathway going adjacent to the properties held by him and his brother. Later, the 4th respondent and his wife have started asserting exclusive right over the pathway and are obstructing the use of the pathway by others including the petitioners and his family members. The petitioners submit, it is a pathway vested in the panchayath and respondents 3 and 4 have no manner of right over the property. It is also submitted that the said respondents have obtained a decree from a civil court and on the strength of the decree obtained by them , they are going to obstruct the pathway. In the above background, the 1st petitioner has filed Ext.P2 representation before the police to enable him and his WPC.NO.1488/2008 .2 family members to use the pathway without obstruction from any one. Thereafter this writ petition is filed. 2. We feel that this is a civil dispute concerning the right to use the pathway. The proper forum to adjudicate the claims of the petitioners is not the police station. They have to either move the competent civil court or the Executive Magistrate under Section 133 of the Cr.P.C. It is not proper for this Court to direct the police to interfere in the dispute in favour of one side or the other. In the result, the writ petition is closed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioners and their right to move other forums for appropriate reliefs. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. cl WPC.NO.1488/2008 .3 WPC.NO.1488/2008 .4