The duty of the court to deter illegal occupation and restore possession, particularly in cases involving advocates taking the law into their own hands.

1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed for a direction to the respondent Police to provide police protection and for restoration of possession of the portion of the property which has been illegally occupied by respondents 5 to 11.

2. The petitioner is the owner of the property which consist of ground and two floors. The petitioner is doing packaged drinking water business in the name and style of M/s. Budha Waters. The petitioner has got necessary permission for running the business from the Statutory Authorities. The petitioner is using the ground floor of the property for her business.

3. The petitioner had let out the first floor of the property for rent to the 11th respondent for running a Community Hall. The 11th respondent became a defaulter and stopped paying the rents. The 11th respondent was also not properly utilizing the property and was giving problems to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner and her husband approached the 11th respondent and requested him to vacate the property. The 11th respondent vacated the rental portion in the 1st floor. But, however he managed to open the petitioner's ground floor Office premises and had converted it into an Advocates' Office and permitted respondents 5 to 10 to illegally occupy the same.

4. The 11th respondent also gave a Complaint against the husband of the petitioner and the 4th respondent Police registered an FIR in Cr.No.927 of 2017, for an offence under Section 454, 380 IPC and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act. The petitioner also gave a Complaint against the 11th respondent and no action was taken by the 4th respondent, and therefore, a Petition was filed before this Court in Crl.O.P.No.13881 of 2017 seeking for a direction to register an FIR. As mentioned above, in the meantime the 11th respondent managed to induct respondents 5 to 10, who are advocates, to illegally occupy the property in the ground floor, which was used by the petitioner to run the business.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is not even in a position to go near the property since the advocates are threatening her and the Police are not taking any action, since petitioners 5 to 10 are advocates. Therefore, the present petition has been filed before this Court seeking for appropriate directions. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner attempted to serve notice on respondents 5 to 11, but however except 2 of the respondents namely; respondents 10 and 11, the others evaded notice and same was returned as unclaimed.

6. This Court also directed the Inspector of Police viz; the third respondent to serve notice on respondents 5 to 11. However, the respondent Police was able to serve only the respondents 5, 6, 10 and 11 and they were not able to serve notice on respondents 7, 8 and 9.

7. When the matter came up for hearing before this Court, it is found that the case has been hanging without any result for more than one year and the respondents 7 to 9 who are advocates have managed to evade notice. Therefore, this Court thought it fit to proceed further and pass final orders in the Criminal Original petition.

8. There is admittedly a landlord and tenant dispute between the petitioner and the 11th respondent. In this case the petitioner had given the first floor of the property on lease to the 11th respondent and it is the case of the petitioner that the 11th respondent had vacated the premises. The 10th respondent has given a Complaint against the husband of the petitioner and others, and the same is pending investigation in Cr.No.927 of 2017. This Court does not want to get into this issue and it is for the parties to agitate the same before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

9. However, one disturbing factor that has come out in this case is that the 11th respondent has managed to illegally take possession of the ground floor and convert a portion of the property as advocates office in the name of M/s.MKS LAW Asso