AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Joseph, J.
Appendix
Petitioner''s Exhibits
Ext. P1
Copy Of The Report of The Finger Print EXPERT Dated 16.1.2008.
Ext. P1 A
Copy of The Judgment in O.S.NO.124/2002 ON The File of Munsiff Court, Karunagappally Dated 4.1.2011
Ext. P2
Copy Of The Report Filed By The Chavara Village Officer Before The Rdo.
Ext. P3
Copy of The Complaint Filed by The Petitioenr Before R3 Dated 16.6.2012.
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:
i. issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction commanding respondents 1 to 3 to afford adequate and effective police protection to the petitioner for construction of the compound wall without being obstructed in any fashion either by the 4th respondent or any other persons engineered by her.
ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction commanding respondents 1 to 3 to take action pursuant to Ext.P3 petition forthwith.
Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:
The petitioner is residing in the address shown in the cause title and is in absolute possession of 14.56 Ares of land in RS. No. 416/18 of Chavara Village and 2.84 Ares comprised in RS. No. 416/18-2 belongs to the wife of the petitioner. The father of the petitioner had purchased some property belonging to the father of the 4th respondent by paying the consideration of the land to increase the width of the pathway. The sale deed was executed on 26.12.1986. There is encroachment by the 4th respondent into the pathway. Father of the petitioner filed O.S. No. 686/1991 for declaration of their right over D schedule road and for consequential injunction. By judgment dated 27.3.1995 and defendants were restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from forcefully entering upon D schedule properties and from taking possession of any portion of D schedule properties. They are also restrained from demolishing the fence which are made separating A and B schedule properties with D schedule property and also from causing any hindrance to the ingress and egress of the plaintiffs and also the peaceful possession of the plaintiffs over the D schedule property. Father of the 4th respondent had filed O.S. No. 124/2002 before the Munsiff Court, Karunagappally stating that the signature in the sale deed was forged. Thereafter the suit came to be dismissed for default. There is a report by the Finger Print Expert, Trivandrum that the signatures were identical and there is no forgery. The 4th respondent had approached the Revenue Divisional Officer by filing a complaint. The Revenue Divisional Officer had directed the Village Officer to conduct an enquiry and to file a report. The Village Officer after conducting enquiry had filed a report before the Revenue Divisional Officer stating that the petitioner had approached the Assistant Tahsildar, Karunagappally for fixation of boundaries and the Additional Tahsildar by order dated 9.11.2011 had refixed the boundary in which the petitioner has about to construct a compound wall. The 4th respondent given a complaint to the RDO. Ext.P2 is the report of the Chavara Village Officer. The petitioner filed a complaint before the Chief Minister. He also filed Ext.P3 complaint before the 3rd respondent police officer and is before us.
We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner would rely on the two judgments in the civil suit which we have referred to. He would point out that the court may grant protection for construction of boundary.
We are of the view that in the facts of this case we may not be inclined to issue a direction to consider the question of police protection for the construction of the compound wall and the petitioner must be relegated to ventilate his grievance before the competent civil court. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek such remedies as are available before the competent civil court, we dispose of this writ petition.