IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 14404 of 2008(M)
1. PAULOSE, S/O.LATE THOMAS PAILI,
... Petitioner
2. SEEROSH THOMAS, S/O.LATE THOMAS PAILI,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE CHIEF
... Respondent
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
3. RAMESAN MASTER, POILINGAL HOUSE,
4. SARAFFUDDIN @ IDDRU, S/O. ABOOBACKER,
5. RIYAZ, PUNJARATH HOUSE,
6. MUJEEB, PUNJARATH HOUSE, KALLURUTY,
7. SHAIJU, CHEMBAPLATA HOUSE,
8. MURTHUMANI, PUTHIYOTTIL HOUSE,
9. SIVARAMAN, CHEMBAPLATA HOUSE,
10. SHIBU @ SIVADASAN, POILINGAL HOUSE,
11. SANTHOSH, POILINAL HOUSE,
12. DIST.SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT,
For Petitioner :SRI.SABU GEORGE
For Respondent :SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :04/06/2008
O R D E R
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR &
M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
-----------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO.14404 OF 2008-M
-----------------------------------------
Dated 4th June, 2008.
JUDGMENT
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The petitioners are brothers. They own 76.6 cents of property in Re-
survey No.51/1 of Neeleswaram Village in Kozhikode district. Their
property was measured by the Taluk Surveyor and at the boundary fixed by
him, the petitioners have constructed a compound wall in 1994, it is
submitted. One of the boundaries of the property is a P.W.D road. In
October, 2007, the Taluk Surveyor, without any notice to the petitioners,
measured the said boundary and planted survey stones inside their property.
Feeling aggrieved by the said proceedings of the Taluk Surveyor, the
petitioners submit, they have already preferred an appeal before the
Superintendent of Survey and Land Records. While so, the respondents 3 to
11 destroyed the compound wall and when the petitioners tried to resist it,
they were threatened by the said respondents. So, the first petitioner lodged
an information before the police and based on that the police have registered
Ext.P5 crime against the party respondents. In the above background, this
writ petition is filed, seeking necessary protection to the life and property of
WPC 14404/08 2
the petitioners.
2. We heard the learned counsel for the party respondents and also
the learned Government Pleader for the official respondents. The above
dispute is a civil dispute regarding the boundary of the property of the
petitioners. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the survey conducted by the
Taluk Surveyor and the fixation of the survey stones, their remedy lies
before the civil court. The decision of the Surveyor is always subject to the
orders of the civil court. The police cannot interfere in this dispute. The
petitioners may pursue the statutory remedy invoked by them. The police
have no role to play in this dispute. So, the prayer for police protection is
declined. But, if any cognizable offence is committed, the power of the
police to register a crime and investigate the same will not be affected by
this judgment.
Subject to the above observation, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
Nm/