Sri.Anand Ture., learned counsel for the petitioner and

Sri.Shravankumar Math., learned counsel for the respondent

have appeared in person.

2.

For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be

referred to as per their ranking and status before the Trial

Court.

3.

The brief facts are these:

It is stated that the plaintiff filed a suit for Perpetual

Injunction in O.S.No.293/2022 on the file of IV Addl. Civil

Judge & J.M.F.C., Kalaburagi. An application – I.A.No.I was also

filed under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of CPC. The Trial Court vide

order dated 17.08.2022 allowed the application and restrained

the defendant, her agents, or representatives under her from

interfering in the construction of the compound wall undertaken

by the plaintiff towards the Western side of the suit property till

the disposal of the suit.

As things stood thus, the plaintiff moved an application –

I.A.No.II under Section 151 of CPC to direct the Circle

Inspector of Police, Station Bazar Police Station, Kalburgi, to

- 3 -

give police protection to him and his family members for

constructing the compound wall in his property and also to

implement the temporary injunction order granted by the

Court. The Trial Court vide order dated 13.09.2022 rejected the

application. This order is called into question in this Writ

Petition on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of

Writ Petition.

4.

Sri.Anand Ture., learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the order passed by the Trial Court is arbitrary

and contrary to the law besides being against the principles of

natural justice.

Next, he submits that the plaintiff produced the complaint

and FIR copy before the Trial Court. He also submitted that the

Trial Court took note of the documents submitted by the

plaintiff about the exclusive ownership and enjoyment of the

suit property by the plaintiff and granted an interim order in

favor of the plaintiff.

A further submission is made that despite the interim

order, the defendant Smt.Gangamma continued to obstruct the

- 4 -

construction of a compound wall on the Western side of the suit

property.

Learned

counsel

vehemently

contended

that

the

construction workers are afraid to carry out construction

activities due to the threat made by the defendant, hence the

plaintiff was constrained to seek police protection.

Lastly, he submits that viewed from any angle, the order

passed by the Trial Court is unsustainable in law and hence the

same is liable to be quashed and the Writ Petition may be

allowed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on

the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in

M.S.MAHADEVAPRASAD & OTHERS VS. MAHADEVAIAH &

OTHERS – Civil Revision Petition No.2/1999 decided on

17.02.2000.

5.

Sri.Shravankumar Math., learned counsel for the

respondent justifies the order passed by the Trial Court.

Next, he submits that the Trial Court has passed the

order of temporary injunction.

- 5 -

A further submission is made that if the defendant

violates the interim order, the plaintiff can as well take recourse

under the law.

Learned counsel vehemently contended that the Trial

Court in extenso referred to the contentions urged on behalf of

the plaintiff and declined to grant police protection. Hence, he

submits that the Writ Petition may be dismissed.

6.

Heard, the contentions urged on behalf of the

respective parties and perused the Writ papers and also the

Annexures with utmost care.

7.

The

following

point

would

arise

for

my

consideration:

Is the Trial Judge justified in rejecting the

application?

The main contention of the plaintiff is that the defendant

is not adhering to the order of the temporary injunction. Hence

he sought the aid of police protection to implement the Order of

the Court.

- 6 -

Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure sets out

exercise of inherent powers by the Court.

For the implementation of an injunction restraining the

defendant from disturbing the plaintiff’s possession of the

disputed land, police p