IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2011 / 21ST ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17219 of 2011(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SAVITHA.M, D/O.LATE E.P.M MENON,AGED 55 YEARS, V.B.TERRACE,FLAT NO.B2,S.R.M ROAD,COCHIN-18. BY ADVS. SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR, SMT.K.K.CHANDRALEKHA, SRI.GOPAKUMAR G. (ALUVA). RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. RADHA.M, W/O.MOHANDAS,AGED 73 YEARS, ATHIRA,SRM ROAD, KRISHNADHI ROAD,COCHIN- 682 018. 2. M.RAVINDRANATH,S/O.LATE E.P.M MENON, AGED 59 YEARS,FLAT NO.203,TOWER NO.9, SKY CITY APARTMENT,VANGARAM,CHENNAI- 600 095. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION,KOCHI CITY, PIN- 682 018. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM CITY, PIN - 682 011. R3 & R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. C.M. CHARISMA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.17219/2011-B: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.3. DTD. 08/06/2011. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE R.3. DTD. 14/06/2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.)C) No.17219 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. Eventhough this Court ordered notice to respondents 1 and 2 by speed post, service is not complete due to non remittance of sufficient fee by the petitioner. Sri.K.C.Santhosh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he was under the impression that this Court had not ordered issue of notice to respondents 1 and 2 but the order was only directing the learned Government Pleader to seek instructions from the 3rd respondent. Today on the basis of telephonic instructions received by her from the 3rd respondent, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the 2nd respondent is permanently put up at Chennai. The 1st respondent is an old woman and the petitioner and the 2nd respondent are siblings. There appears to be some dispute between them over properties, which belonged to their deceased mother. If there are disputes, such disputes should be got resolved through process of civil court. At the moment there is no danger to the life or to the properties of the 2 W.P.)C) No.17219 of 2011 petitioner. 2. Having considered the averments in the writ petition and submissions made by Sri.Santhosh Kumar and Smt.Charishma, learned Government Pleader, we do not find anything warranting issuance of the directions sought for. However, we permit the petitioner to approach the 3rd respondent if and when there is any threat of imminent danger to her life from respondents 1 and 2. If the petitioner approaches the 3rd respondent complaining of imminent danger at the hands of respondents 1 and 2 to her life, the 3rd respondent shall take immediate action. As regards the dispute over properties (shares and debentures which stand in the name of the deceased mother), it is open to the petitioner and also to party respondents to have those disputes settled through the process of civil court. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE ami/