IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 8276 of 2010(H)
1. P.K.BIJU, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.ERAVIKUTTAN
... Petitioner
2. DEEPA BIJU, AGED 38 YEARS,
Vs
1. GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
... Respondent
2. MATHEW JOB, S/O.JOB, PARAKKAL VEEDU,
3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.ESM.KABEER
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
Dated :12/03/2010
O R D E R
K. M. JOSEPH &
M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C).No. 8276 of 2010 H
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 12th day of March, 2010
JUDGMENT
Joseph, J.
The petitioners have approached this Court seeking the
following prayers.
“i) to call for the records relating to
Exts.P1 to P5 and to issue a writ of mandamus
directing the 3rd respondent to afford adequate
police protection to the petitioner’s life and
property from the obstruction of respondents 1
and 2 and their men.
ii) issue any writ, order or direction
directing the 3rd respondent to consider and
dispose of Ext.P5 as expeditiously as possible.”
W.P.(C).No. 8276 of 2010
2
2. Briefly the case of the petitioners is as follows. They are
husband and wife. They are having 92 cents of property as per Ext.P1
document. Respondents 1 and 2 are residing in between a thodu,
separating the petitioners’ property on the northern side. When
respondents 1 and 2 disputed the right over the thodu on the northern
side, the petitioners approached the Taluk Surveyor and after
measuring the property the boundary has been fixed. Ext.P1 is the tax
receipt and Ext.P3 is the sketch of the property. Ext.P4 is the
proceedings in the office of the Taluk Surveyor, which was obtained
after measuring the property and putting the survey stones. Even after
that, respondents 1 and 2 are threatening the petitioners. They filed
Ext.P5 petition before the third respondent for police assistance.
3. We have perused the Writ Petition. We have also heard the
learned counsel for the petitioners. We are not satisfied that the
petitioners have made out a case for interference at this stage. We feel
that this is a matter where the petitioners can be relegated to pursue
their remedy before competent Civil Court.
W.P.(C).No. 8276 of 2010
3
4. Accordingly this Writ Petition is disposed of relegating the
petitioners to approach the competent Civil Court.
(K. M. JOSEPH)
Judge
(M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS)
Judge
tm