IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2011 / 20TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 810 of 2011(A) ------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------ POOKKUNJU, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O.KATHIRU KUNJU, KANDALIL KUTTIYIL, KADAPPA MURI, MYNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM, KERALA, PIN-690 519. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.DILEEP RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM, KOLLAM-1. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM-1. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SASTHAMCOTTA, SASTHAMCOTTA.P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT IN-690 521. 4. THANGAL KUNJU, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM KUTTY, AYANIVILAYIL VEEDU, KADAPPA, MYNAGAPPALLY.P.O., KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 690 519. 5. JAMEELA, AGED 43 YEARS, W/O.SUBAIR, SAJEEV MANZIL, KADAPPA MURI, MYNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 690 519. 6. JAMAL, AGED 50 YEARS, PUTHANPURA THEKKATHIL, KADAPPA MURI, MYNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT-590 519. 7. JASMIN, AGED 30 YEARS, W/O.THANGAL KUNJU, AYANIVILAYIL VEEDU, KADAPPA, MYNAGAPPALLY.P.O., KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 690 519. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK R.BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO:810 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th January, 2011. JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition under Art.226 of the Constitution for issue of directions to respondents 1 to 3 to afford police protection for the petitioner against the alleged illegal, culpable and violent conduct of respondents 4 to 7. 2. According to the petitioner he is the owner of an item of property. There are disputes between him (and his wife) on the one hand and respondents 4 to 7 on the other. Three civil suits are pending. Two before the Munsiff's Court and one before the Sub Court. They are O.S.357/2009 filed by the petitioner against respondents 4 and 5 and O.S.351/2007 filed by the fourth respondent against the petitioner and his wife. The third suit is O.S.898/2010 filed by the seventh respondent against the petitioner and his wife as also the fourth respondent, the husband of the seventh respondent. The civil courts are seized of these civil disputes which are connected in nature. No interim WPC 810/2011 2 directions have been issued by the Civil Court in any of the three matters, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. What is the grievance of the petitioner now? Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondents 4 to 7 are not permitting the petitioner to enter the property in question. On this dispute parties are already before the Civil Court and as many as three connected matters are pending. If the petitioner has a case that the property is in his possession and he is entitled to enter the property without any let or obstructions from respondents 4 to 7 he must seek directions from the Civil Court in the matter. Having not chosen to seek and secure orders from the Civil Court the present attempt to get that dispute resolved by initiating proceedings under Art.226 does not appear to be proper, sound or correct. We are not persuaded to invoke our extraordinary and constitutional jurisdiction under Art.226 to issue any directions or police protection considering the nature of the dispute and the sequence of events. WPC 810/2011 3 4. This petition is in these circumstances dismissed with the above observations. R.BASANT Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 810/2011 4