Kerala High Court
M/S Exterior-Interiors (P) Ltd; 5Th vs The Commissioner Of Police on 29 May, 2008
Bench: K.Balakrishnan Nair, M.C.Hari Rani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 13513 of 2008(H)
1. M/S EXTERIOR-INTERIORS (P) LTD; 5TH
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, COCHIN CITY.
... Respondent
2. ASST.COMMISSIONER POLICE, COCHIN CITY.
3. THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL
4. MRS.PREJITHA NAIR, KRISHNA LEELA,
5. MANOJ MOOTHEDAN, YOUTH CONGRESS LEADER,
For Petitioner :SRI.PAUL MATHEW (PERUMPILLIL)
For Respondent :SRI.C.ANILKUMAR (KALLESSERIL)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :29/05/2008
O R D E R
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR &
M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
-----------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO. 13513 OF 2008-H
-----------------------------------------
Dated 29th May, 2008.
JUDGMENT
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The case of the petitioner is summarized as follows: The petitioner is a company, which is running an educational institution in Kochi. The said institution provides diploma courses in interior designing. The head office of the petitioner is at Kolkatta and one of the branches is functioning in Kochi. It has got ISO 9001 certification for good quality management system, as evident from Ext.P1. The 4th respondent was one of the students of the petitioner's institution at Kochi. She was admitted for the course "Interior Designing" for 2007-08 session. The 4th respondent attended the classes for some time and thereafter demanded refund of the fee paid by her, which was Rs.47,210/-. Ext.P2 is the copy of the registration form signed by her. As per the terms of Ext.P2, students are not entitled to get refund of the fee, if they discontinue the course. On 26.11.2007 the 4th respondent came to the institution with her husband some local goondas and threatened WPC 13513/08 2 the staff of the institution. The person in charge of the branch Smt. Lidiya Jose called the police. On the intervention of the police the situation was diffused. Because of the threat of violence from the part of the 4th respondent, the said officer, who was in charge of the Kochi branch resigned from the institution. Thereupon, Smt.Siji Mammen, the Regional Manager took over the affairs of the Kochi branch. While so, on 19.3.2008, the 4th respondent came along with three strangers, including the 5th respondent, who is said to be the leader of the youth wing of the Congress party. The 4th respondent with the assistance of others, wrongfully confined Smt. Siji Mammen. Later, the police came to the scene and they advised her to settle the matter. Under threat and coercion the said officer was compelled to sign certain documents in Malayalam, which she cannot read or write. Her signatures were obtained in certain blank papers also. Later, she complained to the 1st respondent Commissioner of Police, detailing the above incidents, by submitting Ext.P3 representation dated 24.3.2008. Since Smt.Siji Mammen could not manage the situation, Mr.Bhattacharyya came to Kochi and took over the management of the Kochi Unit. While so, the said officer was taken to the Police Station on 2.4.2008 and he was directed to produce all documents regarding the running of the institution. The threat and violence from the part of the 4th respondent and her WPC 13513/08 3 supporters continued and the institution was closed down for some time. Again, the 4th respondent and her supporters started coming to the institution and causing obstruction. In the above background, for running the institution and safeguarding the interests of the students already admitted, this writ petition is filed, seeking police protection.
2. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit, in which it is submitted that she sought admission to the course, as she believed the claim of the petitioner that the course conducted by it has affiliation to foreign universities in the United States. Later, it was found that the said claim was false. In the above background, the 4th respondent demanded repayment of the money paid by her. Since the petitioner did not oblige, she filed Ext.R4
(b) complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court- II, Ernakulam, which was forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. Consequently, a crime has been registered by the police. The 4th respondent submitted that the petitioner wants to run the institution illegally with the police aid.
3. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions, submitted that a crime has been registered against the petitioner and the police are investigating whether the courses conducted by the petitioner have got affiliation from the foreign universities.
WPC 13513/08 4
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner denied the allegations of the 4th respondent in her counter affidavit. According to him, the petitioner never claimed that the courses conducted by it have affiliation from the foreign universities.
5. Whether the petitioner admitted students holding out a representation that the courses conducted by it have affiliation from the foreign universities, is a disputed question. If the petitioner has done that, the students cannot be blamed, if they protest and claim back the money paid by them. From the materials produced in this case and the dispute raised by both sides, we feel that the police cannot be blamed, if they have refused to stand guard to the institution of the petitioner. We feel that the proper remedy for the petitioner is to move the civil court for appropriate reliefs, seeking injunction against the persons causing obstruction to the running of the classes. The said court can go into the disputed questions of fact also. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner. It is made clear that if any cognizable offence is reported, the police will, definitely, have the power to register a WPC 13513/08 5 crime and investigate the same.
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
Nm/