IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 14TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3470 of 2010(G) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- SHARMILA, AGED 39, W/O.ASHOK KUMAR, ASWATHY, H.NO.285, VAIDYASALA NAGAR, ASRAMAM P.O., KOLLAM-691 002. BY ADV. SRI.P.SIVARAJ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIKOLLUR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. 3. KUNJU KRISHNAN, S/O.PULLAN, PONNACHAN VEEDU, KANNIMEL CHERI, KILIKOLLUR, KOLLAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SUKUMARAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.3470 of 2010-G ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-- “i). to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding and compelling the Ist and 2nd respondents to provide adequate and effective police protection to the lives of the petitioner and her family members and to her 1.60 Ares of property comprised in Sy.No.830/6/2 of Kilikollur Village in Kollam District from 3rd respondent and his henchmen. ii). to direct the Ist and 2nd respondents to consider Ext.P1 complaint and grant relief to the petitioner without any delay.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:-- Petitioner is the owner of 1.60 Ares of property. It is stated that the petitioner has approached this Court for providing adequate and effective police protection to the above property and also to the lives of the petitioner and her family members from 3rd respondent and his henchmen. It is WPC No.3470/2010. -2- further stated that petitioner is residing in a rented house at a distance of one kilometer from the above 1.60 Ares of land. It is stated that the petitioner decided to build a small house in the land. On 29.1.2010 when the petitioner went with her husband for locating the site for construction, the 3rd respondent along with his henchmen tried to criminally trespass into the property of the petitioner and threatened the petitioner and her husband. It is stated that due to the intervention of the people gathered there the petitioner and her husband narrowly escaped from the attack. It is stated that the 3rd respondent has no right to interfere with the enjoyment of the property by the petitioner. It is stated that there was an earlier suit. It is a property dispute. 3. Going through the averments we feel that this is a matter where the petitioner is essentially seeking protection of property against the acts of the 3rd respondent and his henchmen. It is for the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court and seek appropriate reliefs. No doubt, Civil Court has all the powers to enforce its orders including granting of police protection, in accordance with law. Without WPC No.3470/2010. -3- prejudice to the said right of the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS