IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2011 / 11TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 487 of 2011(I) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ PADMANABHAN SOBHINATHAN, KADAYIL VEEDU, VALIYATHURA, VALLAKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.AUGUSTINE JOSEPH, SRI.K.S.ROCKEY. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 1. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 541. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 541. 4. UNNDAPARA RASHEED, UNDAPPARA THADATHARIKATHU VEEDU, CHEKKAKONAM, KARAKULAM-695 564. NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. HAKKIM, S/O.UNDAPPARA RASHEED, UNDAPPARA THADATHARIKATHU VEEDU, CHEKKAKONAM, KARAKULAM - 695 564,NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. ABDUL RASHEED, KUZHIVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, CHEKKAKONAM, KARAKULAM, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 564. 7. SHEFIK, S/O.LATE SHAHUBUDIN, VARIYAKONATHU VEEDU, CHEKKAKONAM, KARAKULAM, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 564. 8. NOORJAHAN, D/O.KHADEEJA BEEVI, VARIYAKONATHU KUNNIL VEEDU, CHEKKAKONAM, KARAKULAM, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 564. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS R4 BY ADVS. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY, SMT.K.R.RIJA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.487/2011 I APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF JUDGMENT DTD. 31/07/1996 IN O.S.NO.430/1980 OF THE SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. P2: COPY OF THE DELIVERY REPORT, KYCHIET AND WARRANT. P3: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DTD. 22/12/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.487 of 2011 ***************************** Dated this the 31st day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of directions under Article 226 to respondents 1 to 3 to afford protection to the petitioner for enjoyment of the property delivered to him under Ext.P2 and to effectively deter any threat to his life and person while he exercises the right over such property delivered to him under Ext.P2. 2. Service is complete. Respondent No.4 alone has entered appearance. The learned counsel for the 4th respondent submits that the 4th respondent accepts that Ext.P2 is in force now, but intends to challenge Ext.P2. According to the 4th respondent, he did not have notice of the proceedings in Ext.P2 though he was shown as a party and shown as served in the proceedings. The learned counsel for the 4th respondent unambiguously stipulates that the 4th respondent shall not in any W.P(C) No.487 of 2011 2 way attempt to obstruct the enjoyment of the property delivered to the petitioner under Ext.P2 and shall not cause any obstruction to the petitioner or pose any threat to his life or person. The 4th respondent has no objection in appropriate orders being granted in favour of the petitioner subject to his legal rights to challenge the proceedings which culminated in Ext.P2. 3. The learned Government Pleader submits that the police are willing to afford protection to the petitioner to enjoy the property delivered to him under Ext.P2 without any obstruction or objection from respondents 4 to 8. 4. Considering the stand taken by the 4th respondent and the fact that the other respondents have not chosen to enter appearance or oppose the prayer and considering the stand taken by the learned Government Pleader, we are satisfied that this Writ Petition can now be allowed. 5. In the result: a) This petition is allowed; b) Directions are issued to respondents 2 and 3 to afford protection to the petitioner for enjoyment of property delivered to him under Ext.P2. Sufficient protection shall be afforded W.P(C) No.487 of 2011 3 against any obstruction to such enjoyment of property and also any threat to the life or person of the petitioner when he enjoys such property delivered to him under Ext.P2. But we make it clear that such right of the petitioner to enjoy the property delivered to him under Ext.P2 shall be subject to further directions by appropriate courts where Ext.P2 is challenged. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/