IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 18872 of 2008(V)
1. P.M.NARAYANI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. S.I. OF POLICE, GURUVAYOOR POLICE
... Respondent
2. S.P. OF POLICE, S.P.OFFICE, DISTRICT
3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF
4. T.G.VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O.GOVINDAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.RANJITH XAVIER
For Respondent :SRI.RAJIT
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :11/08/2008
O R D E R
K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C). No.18872 OF 2008
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of August, 2008
J U D G M E N T
~~~~~~~~~~~
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The petitioner has approached this Court, alleging
harassment from the part of the 1st respondent, at the instance
of the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent claims he is a broker,
who assisted the petitioner to dispose of certain properties
belonging to her. Alleging that no brokerage has been paid by
the petitioner to the 4th respondent, he caused to issued Ext.P1
lawyer notice. To the said notice, the petitioner caused to send
Ext.P2 reply. Thereafter, the petitioner submits the 4th
respondent moved the 1st respondent who in turn is calling the
petitioner to the police station and compelling her to execute
documents in favour of the 4th respondent acknowledging her
alleged liability. So, this writ petition is filed seeking
appropriate directions against the police not to harass her.
W.P.(C) No.18872/2008 2
2. The learned Government pleader, upon instructions,
submitted that the 4th respondent filed a petition complaining
that some amounts are due to him from the petitioner. So, the
police only wanted to enquire into that. Allegations of
harassment are denied by the police. The 1st respondent also
submitted that he has no intention to harass the petitioner.
The 4th respondent submitted that since the petitioner has
failed to pay the brokerage due to him as claimed in Ext.P1, he
is taking recourse to the remedies available under law to recover
the same. He has no intention to harass the petitioner.
The submissions of respondents 1 and 4 are recorded and
the writ petition is disposed of.
(K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE)
(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)
ps