IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS MONDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 6524 of 2010(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- KOMALAN, S/O.KESAVAN, VAZHAYIL MEENATHETHIL, UMBERNADU, THEKKEKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.V.K.SATHYANATHAN SRI.B.BIPIN RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KURATHIKADU, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 5. PRABHAKARAN, AGED 63 YEARS, RESIDING AT ABHILASH, ACKANATTUKARA MURI, THAZHAKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI.T.K. VIPINDAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.6524 of 2010-M ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 1st day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. The relief sought in the writ petition is as follows: “Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to respondents 1 to 4 provide adequate ans effective protection to the life and property of the petitioner comprised in survey No.86/16 of Thekkekara Village from any threat by respondents 5 and 6 and their henchmen.” 2. Briefly put the case of the petitioner as follows: Petitioner is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of 9.05 ares of property inclusive of the building therein. Respondents 5 and 6 are the petitioner's sister's legal heirs and are residing on the northern side of the property belonging to the petitioner. It is stated that petitioner is aggrieved by the illegal, unlawful and W.P.(C) No.6524 of 2010-M -:2:- highhanded acts of respondents 5 and 6 in causing absolute obstructions to the petitioner in enjoying the pathway appurtenant to the aforesaid property which has been enjoyed by, for the past 60 years, in spite of the order of status quo passed by the court below. Ext.P3 is the order of status quo. It is further stated that the property has been devolved on the petitioner by virtue of gift. The petitioner has affected transfer of registry. Thereafter, he has been in factual possession of the property and has been paying land tax and building tax. There is a pathway on the eastern portion of the property of respondents 5 and 6. The description is given. Ext.P2 is the plaint filed by the petitioner and as noted, the Court has already passed an order of status quo. Petitioner prayed for an urgent commission. Ext.P4 is the Commission Report along with the rough sketch. It is stated that there is quietus for some time after Ext.P3. It is further stated that on 24.02.10, the 5th respondent along with his henchmen obstructed the schedule pathway by extending temporary construction and also by putting heap of metal load W.P.(C) No.6524 of 2010-M -:3:- in the middle of 'C' Schedule pathway, that too flouting the orders of the Court. Ext.P5 is the complaint. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. 4. After perusing the averments contained in the writ petition we are of the view that, the approach made to this Court by the petitioner may not be justified. We think that it is for the petitioner to work out his remedy before the Civil court itself. It is also open to the petitioner to follow up the complaint before the Police authorities or even the Criminal Courts, if the petitioner is so advised. Hence, without prejudice to such remedy, the writ petition is disposed of. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. ttb