Kerala High Court
P.A.Ibrahimkutty vs The Superintendent Of Police (Rural) on 23 March, 2017
Author: K.Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 27TH MAGHA, 1939
WP(C).No. 14204 of 2017(A)
--------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
1 P.A.IBRAHIMKUTTY,
AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL MAJEED,
PICHATHARA HOUSE, VALLIVATTOM VILLAGE
KARUPADANNA PO., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680670.
2 ABDUL MAJEED,
AGED 71 YEARS, S/O. KUNJUMUHAMMED,
PICHATHARA HOUSE, VALLIVATTOM VILLAGE
KARUPADANNA PO., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680670.
3 KHADEEJA,
AGED 60 YEARS, W/O. ABDUL MAJEED,
PICHATHARA HOUSE, VALLIVATTOM VILLAGE
KARUPADANNA PO., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680670.
4 SULAIMAN,
AGED 64 YEARS, S/O. KUNJUMUHAMMED
PICHATHARA HOUSE, VALLIVATTOM VILLAGE
KARUPADANNA PO., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680670.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.M.ABDUL JALEEL (KODUNGALLUR)
SRI.T.V.SHAJI
SRI.V.A.AJMAL
RESPONDENT(S):
-------------
1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL)
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN-680003.
2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680121.
3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680121.
WP(C).No. 14204 of 2017 (A)
---------------------------
2
4. MUHAMMED,
AGED 60 YEARS, S/O USMANKUTTY,
ARAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE,
KARUPADANNA PO., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680670.
5. ABDULKADAR,
AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. ALI,
ARAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE,
KARUPADANNA PO., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680670.
6. ALI,
AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. KADAR,
ARAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE,
KARUPADANNA PO., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680670.
7. BASHEER,
AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. IKKAYI,
THARUPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE,
THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE, KARUPADANNA PO.,
MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680670.
R1-R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.P.THAJUDHEEN
R4-R7 BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-02-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 14204 of 2017 (A)
---------------------------
APPENDIX
----------
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.469/2017 OF
VADAKKUMKARA SUB REGISTRY DATED 23.3.2017
EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF SALE DEED NO.1652/1978 OF SRO
VADAKKUMKARA DATED 30.9.1978
EXHIBIT P2(a): COPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED
25.11.2016 OF VO, THEKKUMKARA)
EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.801/1993 OF SRO
VADAKKUMKARA DATED 5.4.1993
EXHIBIT P3(a): COPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 25.11.106
OF VO, THEKKUMKARA
EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF SALE DEED NO.468 /2017 OF SRO
VADAKKUMKARA DATED 23.3.2017
EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE PERMIT BEARING
NO.A5-364/1572/17 DATED 18.03.2017 GRANTED BY THE
SECRETARY VELLANGALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH
EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE
SI OF POLICE IRINJALAKUDA DATED 15.4.2017
EXHIBIT P6(a): COPY OF RECEIPT OF THE ABOVE PETITION
DATED 15.4.2017
EXHIBIT P7: COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE
CI IRINJALAKUDA DATED 15.4.2017
EXHIBIT P7(a): COPY OF RECEIPT OF THE ABOVE PETITION
DATED 15.4.2017
EXHIBIT P8: COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE
RURAL SP, THRISSUR DATED 15.4.2017
EXHIBIT P8(a): COPY OF RECEIPT OF THE ABOVE PETITION
DATED 15.4.2017
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
-----------------------
NIL
/TRUE COPY/
PA TO JUDGE
dkr
K.VINOD CHANDRAN & ASHOK MENON, JJ.
-------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 14204 of 2017
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of February, 2018
JUDGMENT
Ashok Menon, J.
The 1st petitioner claims to be the owner and in possession and enjoyment of property comprised in Survey Nos.734/2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of Thekkumkara Village in Thrissur District, which he allegedly acquired as per Ext.P1 settlement deed. The property originally belonged to petitioners 2 and 3, who are his parents. The base title deeds are Exts.P2 and P3. Mutation was also effected as per Ext.P2(a) and P3(a). Permission was sought by the petitioners 2 to 4 before the Vellangallur Grama Panchayat to construct a compound wall on the eastern and southern boundaries of the properties covered by the aforesaid title deeds and was granted as per Ext.P5. The petitioners are residing about 750 metres away from the aforesaid property. There are fruit bearing trees and presently lying open without any fencing or wall. Respondents 4 to 7 are attempting waste in the property. They are threatening WP(C) 14204/2017 2 petitioners to demolish the wall, if constructed. Exts.P6 to P8 complaints were filed before the police authorities, in vain. Hence the petitioners approached this Court seeking issuance of a writ to direct respondents 1 to 3 to provide necessary protection to the petitioners so as to complete the construction of the compound wall around their property in accordance with Ext.P5 permit without any let or hindrance from respondents 4 to 7 and their men and also to direct the 3rd respondent to take action on Ext.P6 complaint.
2. We heard the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and the Counsel for the petitioners. None appeared for respondents 4 to 7, though notice was served on them. Documents perused.
3. The petitioners claim to be absolute owners of the property in their possession and have allegedly obtained permit from the Panchayat to construct a compound wall around it and the party respondents are allegedly obstructing them from doing so. What right the party respondents have in the property is not known since they have not appeared. However, we find that involving police authorities to facilitate the construction of a wall in the WP(C) 14204/2017 3 property of the petitioners, after removing apprehended obstructions from the party respondents, is not appropriate. The petitioners should ideally approach the civil court for appropriate remedy against the trespassers and obstructors, which they have not done. The materials before us does not reveal any perception of threat to life. No positive direction of police protection need be issued. Complaints, if any, filed by the petitioners revealing any cognizable offence, shall be acted upon by respondents 2 and 3 in accordance with law. With these observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
K.VINOD CHANDRAN Judge ASHOK MENON Judge dkr