Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Surla Satish Kumar Sunny Babu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 4 October, 2021
Author: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
WRIT PETITION No.15387 OF 2021
ORDER:-
This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed seeking writ of mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents 3 and 4-Inspector of Police, Sabbavaram Police Station and Station House Officer of Sabbavaram Police Station, in providing police protection to the petitioners for effective implementation of the Judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.85 of 2012 on the file of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalle, which was passed in their favour and against respondents 5 to 9 herein and others, as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently sought direction to the respondents 2 to 4 to provide police protection to the petitioners against respondents 5 to 9.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.
3. The petitioners have filed a suit in O.S.No.85 of 2012 on the file of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalle, against the respondents 5 to 9 and three others. The said suit was filed for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 8 therein from making any constructions in the suit schedule property or to change the physical features of the said property, till the finalization of final decree proceedings in O.S.No.90 of 1990 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge's Court, Anakapalle. The said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioners herein as per the Judgment and decree dated 2 30.12.2019. As per the said decree, the defendants 2 to 8 therein, who are restrained by way of permanent injunction from making any constructions in the suit schedule property or from changing the physical features of the said property, till finalization of final decree proceedings in O.S.No.90 of 1990 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge's Court, Anakapalle and till the respective shares were delivered to the parties through the Court in the said suit.
4. Now the grievance of the writ petitioners is that despite passing of the said permanent injunction decree restraining the respondents 5 to 9 herein and other defendants in the said suit from making any constructions in the said property, that in utter violation of the said decree, that they are making efforts to make construct in the said property. It is stated that even though the petitioners have approached the police i.e. respondents 3 and 4 with representation to take action against the said persons, who are making an attempt to construct building in the said property in violation of the Court's decree, that the police officials are not taking any action to implement the decree of Court and to prevent them from making any constructions of building in the said property. Therefore, they are before this Court by way of this writ petition seeking police aid for effective implementation of the said Judgment and decree.
5. Despite service of notices, none appeared for respondents 5 to 9.
3
6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on instructions would submit that the 7th respondent herein has filed W.P.No.9391 of 2021 before this Court and obtained a direction against the respondent-police officials not to interfere with the construction activity of the 7th respondent in the said writ petition and thereafter the petitioners herein have filed a complaint in Spandana Programme before the Superintendent of Police and during the course of enquiry of the said complaint, that the 7th respondent urged before the police officials that she obtained an order from this Court directing the police officials not to interfere with the construction activity. Therefore, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that in view of the said order passed by this Court in favour of the 7th respondent, that police could not provide any police aid to the petitioners as requested by them.
7. As already noticed supra, despite service of notices, the unofficial respondents did not turn up for hearing in this writ petition. Even the 7th respondent, who allegedly obtained order from this Court against the police officials not to interfere with the construction activity, did not contest this writ petition. Therefore, it is obvious that suppressing the fact that there is a civil Court decree against the 7th respondent and other respondents not to make any constructions in the property in question, till the shares are delivered, in a partition suit, that was pending in the Court, that the 7th respondent has obtained order from this Court against the police officials. Since there is a decree of civil Court, by way of permanent injunction passed against the respondents 5 to 9 4 herein and other defendants, whereby they were restrained from making any such construction in the property in question, till their shares are delivered in the partition suit that is pending, the respondents herein are bound by the said decree and they cannot make any construction in the property in question in violation of the decree direction and contrary to the said permanent injunction decree that was passed by a competent civil Court in O.S.No.85 of 2012 on the file of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalle.
8. It is settled law that when there is a permanent injunction decree passed by a competent civil Court and when the defendants therein are making efforts to violate the said permanent injunction decree of civil Court, the plaintiffs in whose favour the said decree was passed, are entitled for police aid for effective implementation of said permanent injunction decree passed by the civil Court and to prevent the defendants, who suffered the said decree from violating the said decree. Granting of police aid in the said facts and circumstances of the case is also essential to see that the petitioners being the plaintiffs in the said suit enjoy the fruits of the said decree.
9. Therefore, in the said facts and circumstances of the case, this Writ Petition is allowed and respondents 3 and 4 are hereby directed to provide police aid to the petitioners for effective implementation of the permanent injunction decree in O.S.No.85 of 2012 on the file of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalle, passed in their favour and against the unofficial respondents 5 to 9 herein and others, to prevent the respondents 5 to 9 from making any constructions in the said property in 5 violation of the said civil Court decree. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.
_____________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Date : 04-10-2021 ARR 6 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY WRIT PETITION No.15387 OF 2021 Date : 04-10-2021 ARR