IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2011 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13229 of 2011(C) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. LEKHA KUMARI,D/O.DEVADASAN, PLAVILAVEEDU, CHERUVALAM,KALLARA(PO), NEDUMANGADU TALUK,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, NOW R/AT 'KRISHNA SREE', CHITHARA VILLAGE,KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. KRISHNA M.RAJ(MINOR).D/O.LEKHA KUMARI, AGED 14 YEARS,REP.BY HER MOTHER LEKHA KUMARI, R/AT KRISHNA SREE',CHITHARA VILLAGE,KOTTARAKKARA TALUK,KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. SANTHAKUMARI,W/O.VARADARAJAN, SHYMA BHAVAN,CHERUVALAM, KALLARA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ATTINGAL,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 695 001 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION, KILIMANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.PIN-695 001 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANGOD POLICE STATION,PANGOD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.695 001 4. VIJAYAKUMAR,S/O.LATE DEVADASAN, PLAVILA VEEDU,CHERUVALAM, KALLARA P.O, NEDUMANGADU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.PIN-695 551 5. PADMAKUMAR,S/O.LATE DEVADASAN, ATHIRA BHAVAN, CHERUVALAM, KALLARA PO, NEDUMANGADU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM .PIN -695 551. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.M. CHARISMA R4 & R5 BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts 2/- -2- WP(C)NO.13229/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.636 DATED 23/3/2000 OF KALLARA SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE. P2 COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.718 OF KALLARA SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE DATED 30/3/2006. P3 COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 27/3/2002 ISSUED TO 1ST PETITIONER. P4 COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 27/11/2010 ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. P5 COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 11/4/2011 ISSUED TO THE 3RD PETITIONER. P6 COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 21/1/2011 ISSUED IN THE NAME OF 1ST PETITIONER. P7 COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 21/1/2011 ISSUED IN THE NAME OF 2ND PETITIONER. P8 COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 1/3/2011 ISSUED IN THE NAME OF 3RD PETITIONER. P9 COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 03/04/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P10 COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 6/4/2011 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.13229 of 2011-C ***************************** Dated this the 16th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioners have come to this Court with this petition for issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 1 to 3 – police officials, to afford protection to the petitioners against illegal, culpable and violent conduct on the part of respondents 4 and 5. Petitioners 1, 3, 4 and 5 are siblings. 2nd petitioner is the daughter of the 1st petitioner. According to petitioners 1, 3, 4 and 5, their father owned properties. Before his death, he had executed settlement deeds – Exts.P1 and P2. The petitioners have exclusive rights over 3 shop rooms. It is the case of the petitioners that respondents 4 and 5 are threatening the tenants in the property as also the petitioners. The tenants have already vacated. The petitioners are not being permitted to go to their property. Their life and person is threatened by respondents 4 and 5. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioners have come to this Court seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. W.P(C) No.13229 of 2011-C 2 2. Respondents 4 and 5 have entered appearance through a counsel. The learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 submits that the parties are attempting to talk over the matter and settle the same. According to respondents 4 and 5, there is a lot of vagueness and uncertainty about the stipulations in the settlement deeds. Respondents 4 and 5 are waiting to settle the matter. If not, they shall approach the civil court to set aside the documents as the stipulations therein are not workable. 3. We turned to the learned Government Pleader for submissions. The learned Government Pleader submits that in the perception of respondents 1 to 3, there is no threat to the life or person of the petitioners. It is true that there is a property dispute between the petitioners on the one hand and respondents 4 and 5 on the other. As perceived by respondents 1 to 3, the dispute arises from vagueness of the property allotted to various children under the settlement deed. The police have not chosen to intervene in the dispute between the siblings as the police felt that the dispute is purely a civil one and the disputants must seek appropriate directions from the civil court. The learned Government Pleader submits that there is no perception of any threat against the life of the petitioners. If W.P(C) No.13229 of 2011-C 3 there be any, petitioners shall be at liberty to complain, whereupon respondents 4 and 5 shall take appropriate action. 4. We have considered all the relevant inputs. We are satisfied that the dispute essentially is purely a civil dispute between the parties. We are not persuaded to agree that any directions under Article 226 of the Constitution can, need or deserve to be issued in this Writ Petition. We must leave the parties to settle their civil dispute harmoniously by themselves or by initiation of appropriate proceedings. 5. As regards to the threat to the life of the petitioners, we do not perceive any such threat. We accept the submission of the learned Government Pleader on this aspect. The learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 undertakes that respondents 4 and 5 shall not indulge in any culpable or violent acts against the petitioners. 6. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that this Writ Petition can now be disposed of with appropriate directions. 7. In the result: a) This Writ Petition is allowed; W.P(C) No.13229 of 2011-C 4 b) We accept the submissions of the learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 as also the learned Government Pleader and direct that if there be any threat of violence or harm against the life or person of the petitioners, respondents 1 to 3 must take appropriate action to afford protection to them. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/