IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 20091 of 2008(P)
1. ABDUL VAHID, S/O.MEERA SAHIB,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. IBRAHIM KUNJU,
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY, KAZHAKUTTOM BLOCK
3. THE SECRETARY, KADINAMKULAM GRAMA A
4. SAJITHA SALAM, MEMBER OF
5. SANTHA VISWAN, MEMBER OF BLOCK
6. ABDUL SALAM, S.O.KOHAMMED KUNJU,
7. BEENA, W/O.SUDHEER, MYVALY HOUSE
8. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.DINESH
For Respondent :SRI.M.R.RAJESH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :04/09/2008
O R D E R
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ.
-----------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.20091 OF 2008-P
-----------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The petitioner is the owner of 51 cents of land in Kadinamkulam
Village. A portion of it is converted as a private pathway for his use
and that of some of his neighbours. When M/s Ibrahim Kunju and
Abbas tried to use that pathway, the petitioner moved the civil court
and obtained Exhibit P1 judgment in O.S.No.146/2001. Now, the 7th
respondent with the support of the 6th respondent used the said
pathway and caused damage to his building. Thereupon, the
petitioner filed Exhibit P5 representation before the police seeking
necessary protection. The police was informed of Exhibit P1 judgment
obtained by him. Since, the police did not take any action, this Writ
Petition is filed, seeking appropriate orders to the police to grant
protection.
2. The 3rd respondent Panchayat has filed a counter affidavit,
denying the allegations of the petitioner. It said, it has no intention to
convert the pathway into a public road. The 7th respondent has
submitted that the pathway concerned can be used by the local
W.P.(C)No.20091/08 -2-
people. The petitioner is trying to defeat their right of easement over it.
Going by Exhibit P5, the said respondent points out that the prayer of the
petitioner is to execute the decree obtained by him. Police have no such
power, it is submitted.
3. We notice that the dispute raised in this Writ Petition is a
dispute concerning use of a pathway. The petitioner submits, the 7th
respondent and others have no right over the property, whereas the said
respondent submits that he and others have got a right of easement to
use that pathway. In this dispute, the police have no role to play. The
petitioner has to move the competent civil court to redress his
grievances.
In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the
contentions of the petitioner and his right to move other forums for
appropriate reliefs. But this judgment will not affect the powers of the
police to investigate into the commission of cognizable offences, if any,
reported.
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
dsn