Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Robinson vs The State Of Kerala on 16 November, 2015

Author: A.M. Shaffique

Bench: Ashok Bhushan, A.M.Shaffique

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT:

       THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN
                                &
            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

     MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/26TH MAGHA, 1937

                   WP(C).No. 3848 of 2016 (E)
                   ---------------------------
PETITIONER(S) :-
-----------------

       ROBINSON, AGED 65 YEARS
       S/O.YOVEL NADAR, MEKKUMKARA VEETTIL, POOVATHOOR
       MEKKOLLA DESOM, KOLLAYIL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

       BY ADVS.SRI.R.T.PRADEEP
               SMT.M.BINDUDAS

RESPONDENT(S) :-
------------------

    1. THE STATE OF KERALA
       REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY
       GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT
       THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

    2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS
       VAZHUTHAKKADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 035.

    3. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
       OFFICE OF DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
       NEYYATTINKARA - 695 121.

    4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
       OFFICE OF CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
       NEYYATTINKARA - 695 121.

    5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
       MARAYAMUTTOM POLICE STATION, NEYYATTINKARA - 695 121.

    6. SANTHIL KUMAR @ MOLLYKUTTAN
       RESIDING AT KARIPPUVALA PURAYIDOM, MUKKUMKARA
       POOVATHOOR, KOLLAYIL VILLAGE -  691 541.

    7. ELSON
       RESIDING AT KARIPPUVALA PURAYIDOM, MEKKUMKARA
       POOVATHOOR, KOLLAYIL VILLAGE - 691 541.

       R6 & R7 BY ADV. SRI.MANU V.
       R1 - R5 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.I.DAVIS

       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)  HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD  ON
15-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 3848 of 2016 (E)
---------------------------

                            APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :-
---------------------------

EXT.P-1:    TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DATED 16.11.2015 WITH
RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY OF PETITIONER AND HIS WIFE WITH ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.

EXT.P-2:    TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R DATED 2.1.2016 IN CRIME
NO.6/2015 OF MARAYAMUTTOM POLICE STATION WITH ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.

EXT.P-3:    TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 30.1.2016 BY
PETITIONER BEFORE 5TH RESPONDENT WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.


RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :-
---------------------------

EXT.R6(a): TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.No.2 OF 2016 OF THE
MUNSIFF'S COURT, NEYYATTINKARA, WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

EXT.R6(b): TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL
MUNSIFF, NEYYATTINKARA IN I.A.No.7 OF 2016 IN O.S.No.2 OF 2016,
WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.


                          //TRUE COPY//



                          P.A. TO JUDGE



                     ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J &
                        A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
                  ----------------------------------------
                     W.P.(C) No.3848 of 2016
                 -----------------------------------------
            Dated this the 15th day of February 2016


                           J U D G M E N T

Shaffique, J.

This writ petition is filed seeking for police protection alleging that respondents 6 and 7 are preventing the petitioner from constructing boundary of his property. It is stated that there was an existing compound wall, which was demolished by the private respondents. A crime is pending investigation as Crime No.6 of 2015. Still no action has been taken by the police to render necessary protection to construct the compound wall and hence, this writ petition is filed.

2. Counter affidavit has been filed by the 6th respondent inter alia stating that the 6th respondent has filed a suit, O.S.No.2 of 2016 before the Munsiff's Court, Neyyattinkara and an interim injunction has already been granted restraining the petitioner from trespassing into the plaint 'B' schedule pathway or putting up a boundary wall appropriating a portion of the said pathway. It is stated that this writ petition has been filed without disclosing the pendency of the civil suit.

W.P.(C) No.3848 of 2016 -: 2 :-

3. Having regard to the fact that a writ petition has been filed without reference to the pendency of the civil suit, we do not think it proper to go into the details of the matter and issue any direction as prayed for. It is always open for the petitioner to approach the civil court and seek necessary reliefs.

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-

A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE Jvt/15.2.2016.