IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2009 / 15TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 13879 of 2009(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DR. M.S.NANGELI ANTHERJANAM, W/O. DR. C.D.RADHAKRISHNAN, HOUSE NO.51, KAMMANCHERIL HOUSE, SANKAR NAGAR, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.MOHANAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE HOME SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION, ERAVIPURAM, KOLLAM. 3. DR. S.JAGADEESH, S/O. SIVADASAN, REMA DALE, MAYYANAD P.O., IRAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.PHILIP M.VARUGHESE GP MR.P A SALIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC 13879/09 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 PHOTO COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT EXT.P2 PHOTO COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT.17.5.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE P.R.RAMAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO.13879 OF 2009-D -------------------------------------------------------- Dated 6th August 2009 Judgment RAMAN, J. The petitioner is stated to be the owner of an extent of 30 cents of land in Block No.26 in Sub Division No.26/7/2 of Eravipuram village in Kollam taluk. According to her, the property is well bounded on all sides with survey stones and fencing. The third respondent is a close relative of the husband of the petitioner. There was an offer from his side to purchase the property of the petitioner, but she declined. So, he is not happy with the petitioner. The third respondent is having certain extent of property adjacent to the property of the petitioner. The petitioner submits, taking advantage of the nearness of her property with that of the third respondent, the said respondent is intimidating the petitioner WPC 13879/09 2 and her workers and physically threatening and preventing them from entering the property. 2. The third respondent entered appearance through counsel and would submit that there is already a pathway between the property of the petitioner and that of the said respondent and the present attempt of the petitioner is only to close the said pathway. 3. We find that the above dispute is a civil dispute, which can be adjudicated only in the civil court. However, the police will see that the dispute between the parties is not slipped into any law and order problem. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE WPC 13879/09 3 sta