IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2007 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1929 WP(C).No. 13963 of 2007(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O. VISWANATHAN, AGED 37 YEARS, PARUVASSERY, AYAKKAD AMSOM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY SRI.N.A.ABHILASH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY HOME SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADAKKENCHERY POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DIST. 4. VASU, S/O. VELLAPPAN, AGED 52 YEARS, MULANTHOTTIL, PARUVASSERY, AYAKKAD AMSOM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.CHANDRAN SRI.S.SUJITH SRI.V.A.SASIDHARAN SRI.JOSEPH ALBIN NEDUNTHALLY BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.A. SALIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/05/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.13963 OF 2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 497/2000 OF S.R.O.VADAKKENCHERY EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE PASSED INO.S.NO.277/2000 ON THE FILE OF MUNSIFF COURT, ALATHUR DATED 19.12.2002. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN A.S.NO.68/2003 PASSED BY THE DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD DATD 19.1.2006. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 18.4.2007 FIELD BEFORE RESPONDENTS 2 & 3. // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE. P.R. RAMAN & K. HEMA, JJ. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.13963 of 2007 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of May, 2007. JUDGMENT Raman, J. Heard both sides. 2. Petitioner seeks for a direction to respondents 1 to 3 for adequate police protection to his life and also for cultivation of his property covered by Ext.P1. The party-respondent No. 4 entered appearance and filed counter-affidavit. His only objection is that under the guise of carrying out agricultural operations, petitioner was reducing the width of the road in dispute. Petitioner undertakes that he will not reduce the existing width of the road. There will be a direction to the Sub Inspector of Police, the 3rd respondent, to give protection to the life of the petitioner and also to carry out agricultural operations. However, petitioner shall not, under the guise of agricultural operations, reduce the width of the road, which is in dispute. With the above direction, Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE. Sd/- K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs. // True Copy //