IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 16657 of 2008(G)
1. K.K.GOPINATHAN PILLAI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. MINI, KADAVUNGAL VADAKKETHIL HOUSE,
... Respondent
2. RATHNAMMA, KADAVUNGAL VADAKKETHIL HOUSE,
3. MANOJ, S/O.CHELLAPPAN PILLAI,
4. SIVAN PILLAI, S/O.NARAYANA PILLAI,
5. SREENIVASAN PILLAI, S/O.NARAYANA PILLAI,
6. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.M.POULOSE
For Respondent :SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :25/06/2008
O R D E R
K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
---------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 16657 OF 2008
------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of June, 2008
J U D G M E N T
~~~~~~~~~~~
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The petitioner is the owner of a property having an extent
of 4.95 ares of land in Re-Survey No.381/17 of Bharanikavu
village. When, the respondents 1 to 3 tried to trespass into the
said property, the petitioner moved the civil court and the suit
was decreed. Ext.P1 is the judgment and the Ext.P2 is the
decree. The said decree was executed as evident from Ext.P3.
The boundary of the property was demarcated and the
petitioner erected barbed wire fencing with the assistance of
the court. The same was done on 3.4.2008. But, the
respondents 1 to 5 are not ready to respect the orders of the
civil court. They cut the barbed wire fencing and trespassed
into the property of the petitioner. Thereupon, the petitioner
filed Ext.P4 representation before the police. As per the prayer
in that petition he is requesting the Sub Inspector of Police,
W.P.(C) No.16657/2008 2
5th respondent herein, to inspect the site, so that, the said officer
could convince himself of the illegal actions of the party
respondents. He prays for necessary police protection including
that of women police constable to put up the destroyed barbed
wire fencing.
2. This Court cannot adjudicate whether the party
respondents have violated the decree of the civil court and on
finding violation remedy the same by issuing appropriate
direction. The police also have no such power or authority in
this matter. In the absence of failure of duty from the part of
police, we cannot issue any direction to them as sought for by
the petitioner. The petitioner has to move the Execution court
and seek appropriate orders including direction to the police to
render assistance to the petitioner, so that, he can put up the
barbed wire fencing. The police cannot be conceded the
authority to decide an allegation regarding violation of a decree.
None of the statutes in force in India authorise the police to do
that. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioner for mandamus to
the police to give adequate protection as requested in Ext.P4
cannot be granted.
W.P.(C) No.16657/2008 3
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, without
prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner and his right to
move the competent civil court for appropriate reliefs.
(K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE)
(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)
ps