IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2011 / 3RD BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 22570 of 2011(U) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- FLORA BHAMINI.P.O., T.C.11/522, HOLY TENT, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-3. BY ADVS. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS SRI.ROSHEN.D.ALEXANDER SRI.ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE(RURAL) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARASSALA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 502. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARASSALA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 502. 4. LAWRENCE ISAAC, 02-1023, A.P.BHAVAN, NARANI, KUNNATHUKAL.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 504. 5. W.R.AJITH SINGH, 02-1023, A.P.BHAVAN, NARANI, KUNNATHUKAL.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 504. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.22570/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 16.9.2002 IN OS. 1326/1989 ON THE FILES OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, NEYYATTINKARA. P1(a):- COPY OF THE DECREE DTD. 16.9.2002 IN OS. 1326/1989 ON THE FILES OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, NEYYATTINKARA. P2:- COPY OF THE DELIVERY KAICHEETU DTD. 31.3.04 PREPARED BY THE AMIN DEPUTED BY THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, NEYYATTINKARA. P3:- COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 3.8.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P3(a):- COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 3.8.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 5.8.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE IST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.22570 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. This writ petition has been instituted by the petitioner seeking police protection for construction of a compound wall by the petitioner, free from the obstructions from respondents 4 and 5. According to the petitioner, though she approached the police by filing Ext.P3 petition, the police has not taken any action upon the same. On considering the writ petition for admission, we issued notice by special messenger to the party respondents. We also directed the learned Government Pleader to seek instructions from respondents 2 and 3 as to what action if any was taken on Exts.P3 and P4 complaints submitted by the petitioner and further that if no action was so far taken, they will have to enquire into Exts.P3 and Ext.P4 immediately and appraise the learned Government Pleader 2 W.P.(C) No.22570 of 2011 of the information gathered from the enquiry. Today, eventhough respondents have been served with notice, they have not come forward to resist this writ petition. Learned Government Pleader submitted that the police are yet to receive any complaint or petition filed by the petitioner. However, pursuant to this Court’s order, an enquiry was conducted and in the said enquiry party respondents told the police that they have no objection in the petitioner constructing the proposed compound wall. 2. Learned Government Pleader also submitted that the petitioner and the party respondents do not share any boundary in common. Mr.Bechu Kurian Thomas learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the stand taken by the police that they have not received any complaint from the petitioner, is not correct in view of Ext.P3(a) receipt. We find merit in the above submission of Mr.Bechu. The averments in the writ petition stands established by non- traversed. We take into account the submissions of the learned Government Pleader also. We do not find any 3 W.P.(C) No.22570 of 2011 reason as to why the relief sought should not be granted. Hence, we allow this writ petition and direct respondents 2 and 3 to afford adequate and effective police protection to the life and property of the petitioner covered by Ext.P1(a) decree and also in the matter of the petitioner carrying out construction of a compound wall for the purpose of fortifying the boundary of the property in question, in case there is obstruction to such construction by respondents 4 and 5 or anybody else. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE ami/