IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2010 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 31929 of 2009(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- K.VELAYUDHAN MEMORIAL TRUST (KVM TRUST) CHERTHALA, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR DR. V.V.PYARILAL S/O. LATE K.VELAYUDHAN, AGED 61 YEARS, SARASWATHAM, MARUTHOVATTOM MURI, THANNEERMUKKAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN SRI.GEORGE MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ALAPPUZHA. 2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CHERTHALA. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHERTHALA. 4. CITU VARANADU SOUTH UNIT, VARANADU.P.O., CHERTHALA, REP. BY ITS CONVENOR. SURENDRAN. 5. BMS, VARANADU SOUTH UNIT, VARANADU.P.O CHERTHALA, REP. BY ITS CONVENOR K.R.HARIDAS. 6. INTUC VARANADU SOUTH UNIT, VARANADU.P.O., CHERTHALA, REP. BY ITS CONVENOR MURALEEDHARN. 7. AITUC, VARANADU SOUTH UNIT, VARANADU.P.O CHERTHALA, REP. BY ITS CONVENOR DEVADAS. 8. JSS, VARANADU SOUTH UNIT, VARANADU.P.O., CHERTHALA, REP. BY ITS CONVENOR PRATHAPAN. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS. R4 TOO R7 BY ADV. SRI.B.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.31929/2009: APPENDIX: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1..TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY OF PETITIONER DATED 25.9.09. EXT.P2.. TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 24.10.09. EXT.P2A.TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.10.2009. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R4A..TRUE COPY OF THE ATTENDENCE REGISTER DATED 11.10.2009. EXT.R4B.. TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 11.10.2009 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE RESPONDENTS AND THE CONTRACTOR. K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.31929 of 2009-I ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 16th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Cort seeking police protection against respondents 4 to 8. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is that petitioner is carrying on construction work in the property covered by Ext.P1. The petitioner is stated to be a charitable trust and that the construction work is for the purpose of Pharmacy College, hostel building, auditorium etc. It is the case of the petitioner that respondents 4 to 8 obstructed the construction work and the construction work is stopped. Petitioner filed Ext.P2 complaint before the 3rd respondent. 2. A counter affidavit is filed by respondents 4 to 7. Along with the counter affidavit they have produced Exts.R4(a) and R4(b). Ext.R4(b) is an agreement executed between the party respondents and the contractor. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the parties. WPC 31929/2009 -2- Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is willing to abide by the terms in Ext.R4(b) agreement. Learned counsel for respondents 4 to 7 would submit that in the event of the petitioner honouring the terms of Ext.R4(b) agreement there will be no obstruction. The writ petition is disposed of recording the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents 4 to 7. We make it clear that if there is any obstruction by respondents 4 to 7 even after the honouring of the terms of Ext.R4(b) by the petitioner, respondents 1 to 3 will provide adequate protection to the petitioner. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS