IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19434 of 2008(L)
1. DR. B.SSIKUMAR, AGED 43 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. BAHULEYAN, CHEMBUMKUZHY,
3. VIJESH, S/O BAHULEYAN,
Vs
1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN
For Respondent :SRI.C.S.MANILAL
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :09/07/2008
O R D E R
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ.
-----------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.19434 OF 2008
-----------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 9th DAY OF JULY, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The petitioner owns 20 acres of rubber plantation near
Aryankavu in Kollam District. He entered into an agreement with the
2nd respondent concerning slaughter tapping of the rubber trees of the
said estate. Exhibit P1 is a photocopy of the said agreement. The 2nd
respondent was entitled to cut and remove the trees also. The total
consideration for transfer of those rights in favour of the said
respondent was Rs.45 lakhs. The petitioner submits, he received
Rs.15 lakhs in advance. Later, it appears, the 2nd respondent became
disinterested and he abandoned the slaughter tapping. Thereafter, the
said respondent started demanding the amount paid by him. The 3rd
respondent who is the son of the 2nd respondent is also supporting the
2nd respondent. When the petitioner did not oblige, they came to the
petitioner’s residence and manhandled him. On the basis of the
information lodged by him, a crime has been registered as Crime
No.162/08 of Kulathoopuzha Police Station under Sections 457, 506(i),
341 and 323 read with Section 34 of IPC. The petitioner also filed
W.P.(C)No.19434/08 -2-
Exhibit P2 petition before the Sub Inspector of Police, Kulathoopuzha to
give protection to him. Since, the police did not take any effective action,
this writ petition is filed, seeking appropriate reliefs.
2. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted
that after the registration of the crime, there was no threat to the life of
the petitioner from the part of respondents 2 and 3. The respondents 2
and 3 have filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations of the
petitioner. According to them, after the execution of Exhibit P1
agreement, the 3rd respondent tapped the rubber trees for some time.
Later, the petitioner wanted to get back the timber which as per the
agreement was belonging to the 2nd respondent. The dispute between
the petitioner and the 2nd respondent was settled and the value of the
latex extracted by the 2nd respondent was fixed as Rs.11.5 lakhs. The
petitioner agreed to repay the balance amount of Rs.8.5 lakhs to him.
Thereafter, the petitioner took over the possession of the estate and
started tapping there. But, he did not honour his words and did not
return Rs.8.5 lakhs. Instead, when the 2nd respondent went to the estate
demanding the amount due to him, he was threatened by the petitioner,
his workmen and hired muscle men. So, he preferred Exhibit R2(a)
petition before the C.I. of Police, Kulathoopuzha. The C.I. of Police called
both sides and a settlement was arrived at in his presence, wherein the
W.P.(C)No.19434/08 -3-
petitioner agreed to repay Rs.8.5 lakhs within 45 days. Within two days
after the settlement, the petitioner has filed this Writ petition, it is
submitted. So, the 2nd respondent submits, the motion made before this
Court is without any bona fides.
3. The petitioner denies the above allegations of the 2nd
respondent and also the settlement stated to have been arrived at before
the C.I. of Police agreeing to pay Rs.8.5 lakhs to the 2nd respondent.
4. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and counter
allegations, we feel that this is not a fit case for this Court to invoke its
discretionary jurisdiction and pass any order in favour of the petitioner.
The petitioner to redress his grievance, if any, has to work out the
ordinary remedies available to him as per the Code of Criminal Procedure
and the Code of Civil Procedure.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the
contentions of both sides.
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,JUDGE.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
dsn