IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2009 / 12TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 162 of 2009(T) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. C.SELVARAJ, S/O.CHELLAPPAN, THUZHARAM VEEDU, KUTTUKALKONAM, KATTACHALKUZHY, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE. 2. SANTHAKUMARI, D/O.DASAMMA, MUDIVILAKAM VEEDU, VAZHUTHOOR DESOM, NEYYATTINKARA VILLAGE. 3. SREEKUMARI, D/O.DASAMMA, BEANS VILLAGE, KOTTUKALKONAM KOTTACHALKUZHY, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.J.DEVADANAM SRI.VINOD J.DEV SRI.PRAMOD J.DEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. S.I. OF POLICE, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. GIREESAN, S/O.GOPINATHAN, VARUVILAKAM VEEDU, KOTTUKALKONNAM, KATTACHALKUZHY, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE. 5. SUNIL KUMAR, S/O.GOPINATHAN, DO.DO. 6. SHIBU, S/O.NELSON, PALLINADA VEEDU KOTTUKALKONAM, KATTACHALKUZHY, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE. WP(C).No. 162 of 2009 -2- 7. SATHIKUMAR @ GEORGE, S/O.JAMES, PALLINADA VEEDU, KOTTUKALKONAM, KATTACHALKUZHY, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE. 8. SREEJITH, S/O.SREEDHARAN, DO.DO. 9. RENJITH, S/O.DO.DO. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B. KOSHY, Ag.C.J. & V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C)No.No.162 of 2009 ------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT KOSHY, Ag.C.J. The petitioners seek police protection for the construction of a compound wall. According to them, they have got a judgment in their favour, granting an ex parte injunction in O.S.No.338/08 on the files of the Principal Munsiff's Court, Neyyattinkara. 2. We do not know whether an application for setting aside the ex parte judgment is filed and any order is passed by the said court. The judgment granting injunction order was passed on 26.11.2008 and subsequently they got a copy of the same. When the copy was received by the petitioners is not mentioned in the writ petition. 3. For constructing a compound wall, boundaries are to be fixed and petitioners have to get appropriate orders from the civil court. 4. According to the petitioners, their lives are also under threat. Without expressing W.P.(C)No.No.162 of 2009 :: 2 :: any opinion on the merits of the case, we direct the police to maintain law and order and they shall see that the lives of both sides are not endangered. If the injunction order is violated, there is adequate remedy for the petitioners. This court cannot act as an executing court of a Munsiff's court. Writ petition is disposed of subject to the above observations and directions. Sd/- (J.B. KOSHY) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge