IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2008 / 24TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19677 of 2008(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ SATHISH KUMAR , AGED 35 YEARS, KESAVAN, KOLLATHENGAL HOUSE, POST KUNNAMKULAM KANNIYAMPAL DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. 4. JOY, S/O. MATHEW, CHEMANOOR HOUSE POST KUNNAMKULAM, KANNIYAMPAL DESOM THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.19677/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DT.11.12.2007 BETWEEN THE PETITONER AND THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 14.6.2008. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.19677 OF 2008 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner along with his brother and sister entered into an agreement with the 4th respondent, for the sale of a property having an extent of 62 cents in Re-survey No.111/3/3 of Kunnamkulam village to the 4th respondent. As per the agreement, the sale deed has to be executed before 10.6.2008. Only an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- towards advance was paid. The 4th respondent did not pay the balance consideration for execution of sale deed, though Ext.P2 lawyer notice was issued alerting him about the expiry of the time limit. Thereafter, it appears the 4th respondent has filed a petition before the 1st respondent which in turn was forwarded to the 2nd respondent for enquiry. The 2nd respondent is calling the petitioner to the police station unnecessarily, it is submitted. In view of the above harassment of the police to settle a civil dispute between him and the 4th respondent, this writ petition is filed. W.P.(C) No.19677/2008 2 2. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that on the receipt of the complaint from the 4th respondent, once a constable was sent to the petitioner's residence to collect his telephone number. Though the petitioner was called to the police station, he did not appear. The learned Government Pleader denies the allegations of harassment by the police and further submits that the police have no intention to interfere in the civil dispute or harass the petitioner or other co-owners of the property. The above submission is recorded and the writ petition is disposed of. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) ps