Issuance of direction to police by the Civil Court.

Somasundaram, J.

This C.M.P. has been referred to the Bench in as much as the view taken by Srinivasan, J., in G.Krishnan v. Tmt. Thulasi Ammal, (1991)1 L.W. 513, with regard to the scope of the inherent powers of the court under Sec.151, C.P.C. (hereinafter called the Code), is in conflict with the view taken by Shanmukham, J. in C.M.P.No.352 of 1986 in A.S.No.297 of 1980.

2. The petitioner filed a suit O.S.No.36 of 1984 on the file of Sub-Court, Nagapatinam for declaration that he is the Madathipathi and Adheenakartha of Shri Arunachala Gnanadesika Swamigal Ve-danta Sravana Mutt, Panchanadikulam and for a consequential permanent injunction. After trial, the trial court came to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled to the relief of declaration and permanent injunction and decreed the suit O.S.No.36 of 1984. As against the judgment and decree in O.S.No.36 of 1984, the respondents have preferred, A.S.No.730 of 1987 before this Court and the same is pending. In the said appeal the petitioner filed the present C.M.P. requesting this Court to direct the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruthuraipoondi to afford police protection in order to preserve the movable properties situated in Sri Arunachala Gnanadesika Swamigal Vedanta Sravana Mutt, Panchanadikulam and to prevent the cutting of casurina trees in the property forming subject matter of O.S.No.36 of 1984 on the file of Sub-Court, Nagapattinam pending disposal of A.S.No.730 of 1987.

3. When the C.M.P. came up for hearing before Srinivasan, J., the learned Judge on 112. 1990, passed the order of reference in the following terms:

"This is an application under Sec.151, C.P.C, for directing the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruthuraipoondi to afford police protection in order to preserve the movable properties of the Mutt and trees situated on the land. In my judgment dated 112. 1990 in C.R.P.No.2853 of 1990, I had taken a view that civil courts cannot issue directions to the police officials in order to execute the orders of civil court or implement the orders of injunction passed by civil courts. In that judgment, I have made a reference to the judgment of Shanmukham, J. in C.M.P.No.352 of 1986 in A.S.No.297 of 1980 wherein he had held that such orders could be passed. In my judgment in the civil revision petition, I had stated that the case before Shanmukham, J., arose in this Court in an appeal and the case in the civil revision petition arose in the lower court. Hence, I though that there was no necessity to refer the matter to a Bench, though I had expressed a different view from that of Shanmukham, J.,

2. But in this case the question arises directly for consideration, If I take the same view as I had taken in C.R.P.No.2853 of 1990, it will be in conflict with the view taker by Shanmukham, J. in the circumstances, I think it is better to refer the matter to a Division Bench for an authoritative pronouncement.

3. My order in C.R.P.No.2853 of 1990 dated 112. 1990 may be treated as part of this order for referring the matter to a Bench. Hence the office is directed to place the papers before my Lord the Chief Justice for constituting a Bench to decide this question which arose for consideration in this case.“

In these circumstances, the matter is referred to us and the short but important question we have to examine here is this.

”Whether the civil courts can issue directions to the Police Officials in order to execute the order of the civil courts or to implement the order of injunction passed by the civil courts.“

4. Mr.G.Subramaniyam, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there being no provision in the Code in this behalf, the civil court has inherent powers under Sec.151 of the Code to issue directions to the police officials in order to execute the orders of the civil courts or to implement the order of injunction passed by the civil court. On the other hand, Mr.IIango, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that t