Can a plaint be quashed under Art.226 or Art.227 of the Constitution? This important question arises for consideration in this petition.

2. This petition is filed, mainly, on the following averments: In 1962, petitioner’s father had taken a shop room on lease from 2nd respondent’s father. The original landlord and tenant, both expired. Petitioner, his brothers and mother continued as tenants and they are running business in the shop room in photostat, telephone booth, fax, lamination etc., under the style, “City photostat”. Formerly, textile business was conducted in the shop till 1986. Petitioner is paying profession tax and electricity bills for the room. His employees are also registered with labour department.

3. After death of original landlord, his children (one of them is 2nd respondent) tried to trespass into the shop room and on 16.10.208, a suit was filed by petitioner and his mother as O.S. No.2881/2006 to restrain forceful eviction from the shop room. The suit was decreed on 16.10.2008 and injunction was granted. The copy of judgment is Ext.P4.

4. After about two years, in 2010, 1st respondent made attempts to trespass into the room and demolish the wall of the shop room and to obstruct the business conducted in the room, on the claim that he purchased the room. Petitioner and his mother were constrained to file a suit on 16.7.2010 as O.S. No.2180/2010 against 1st respondent to prohibit such illegal acts. The copy of the plaint in the said suit is Ext.P5. The 1st respondent also filed a suit as O.S. No.2426/2010 against petitioner, his mother and brothers claiming exclusive title over the property. In the said suit, first respondent also filed an interlocutory application for injunction against petitioner and his mother but it was dismissed 06.09.2010 with costs. The copy of the order is Ext.P6.

5. First respondent and his goondas started threatening petitioner forcing him to vacate the shop room. Petitioner was forced to file a complaint on 18.7.2010 before police (Vide Ext.P7 and Ext.P8). But, under his influence from 1st respondent, the Sub Inspector took the side of 1st respondent and he also started threatening petitioner. Therefore, petitioner made a representation against Sub Inspector before Deputy Superintendent of Police, as per Ext.P9. Despite all these, harassment from police also continued.

6. Petitioner was forced to file a Writ Petition against police harassment, as W.P.(C) No.36924/2010. In the said Writ Petition, Government Pleader made a submission that police will not interfere since it is a civil dispute and the Writ Petition was disposed of, accordingly. The copy of the judgment is Ext.P10. However, first respondent filed an undertaking dated 19.7.2010 as Ext.P12 in O.S. No.2180/2010 that he will not forcefully dispossess petitioner from property, he will not cut open the wall of the room etc.

7. Thereafter, on 21.4.2011, 1st respondent and his hench men entered premises of the shop room and broke open the lock and removed furniture and equipments kept in the room. Certain other valuable articles were also removed. Northern wall of the room was partly demolished to create an opening to the adjacent room on its north. A complaint was again filed by petitioner before police and a case was registered on 22.4.2011 against 1st respondent and copy of F.I.R. is Ext.P11.

8. First respondent’s threat continued and petitioner apprehended illegal dispossession. Petitioner was therefore forced to move this Court for police protection, as per W.P.(C) No.12638/2011. An interim order dated 26.4.2011 was passed by this court in the Writ Petition granting effective police protection to enable petitioner to carry on the business smoothly in the shop room. The interim order was, later, made absolute, as per Ext.P13-order, after hearing 1st respondent also on merit.

9. First respondent had also tried to get power connection to the room disconnected, by influencing Corporation and it was disconnected a