JUDGMENT :

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

1. The petitioner is before us claiming police protection against the illegal acts perpetrated by respondents 3, 4, 5. The party respondents are said to be constantly interfering with the peaceful possession of a property owned by the petitioner and that too by repeatedly flouting the orders of the Civil Court. The petitioner purchased the subject property as per Ext.P1 title deed. The tax receipt is seen at Ext.P2 and the Possession Certificate is seen at Ext.P3.

2. The 3rd respondent filed a suit (O.S. No. 443 of 2007) claiming title over the property. The petitioner had filed a counter claim in the above suit. Even when the suit was pending there was an injunction order in favour of the petitioner and by Ext.P7, the learned Munsiff had directed police protection to enable the petitioner to take yield from Plaint B schedule property. Eventually by Ext.P4 ex-parte decree dated 17.10.2012, the suit was dismissed and the counter claim allowed. The petitioner approached the Execution Court. The 4th respondent, the rd respondent's husband, filed an application for dismissing the execution petition on the ground that he was living in the neighbouring prope