IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2008 / 20TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 18872 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.M.NARAYANI, W/O.LATE V.N.KUTTY, VELIYAVALAPPIL(KRISHNAKRIPA) KIZHAKKE NADA, GURUVAYOOR, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, TRICHUR. BY ADV. SRI.RANJITH XAVIER RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. S.I. OF POLICE, GURUVAYOOR POLICE STASTION, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR. 2. S.P. OF POLICE, S.P.OFFICE, DISTRICT COLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE,THRISSUR 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM 4. T.G.VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O.GOVINDAN, THEKKUTTAYIL HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR PO., CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT FOR R4 SRI.RANJIT BABU FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.18872/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 19.1.2008 SENT BY ADV. MANOJ P.S., KUNNAMKULAM. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE SAID REPLY NOTICE DATED 24.01.2008, SENT BY ADV. RANJITH XAVIER, THRISSUR. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C). No.18872 OF 2008 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner has approached this Court, alleging harassment from the part of the 1st respondent, at the instance of the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent claims he is a broker, who assisted the petitioner to dispose of certain properties belonging to her. Alleging that no brokerage has been paid by the petitioner to the 4th respondent, he caused to issued Ext.P1 lawyer notice. To the said notice, the petitioner caused to send Ext.P2 reply. Thereafter, the petitioner submits the 4th respondent moved the 1st respondent who in turn is calling the petitioner to the police station and compelling her to execute documents in favour of the 4th respondent acknowledging her alleged liability. So, this writ petition is filed seeking appropriate directions against the police not to harass her. W.P.(C) No.18872/2008 2 2. The learned Government pleader, upon instructions, submitted that the 4th respondent filed a petition complaining that some amounts are due to him from the petitioner. So, the police only wanted to enquire into that. Allegations of harassment are denied by the police. The 1st respondent also submitted that he has no intention to harass the petitioner. The 4th respondent submitted that since the petitioner has failed to pay the brokerage due to him as claimed in Ext.P1, he is taking recourse to the remedies available under law to recover the same. He has no intention to harass the petitioner. The submissions of respondents 1 and 4 are recorded and the writ petition is disposed of. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) ps