JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed, inter alia, to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to afford adequate police protection to the petitioner to remove its machinery, equipments and other articles mentioned in Ext. P2 list (‘equipments’, in short) without any obstruction from the sixth respondent and his men.

2. The fifth respondent had hired the equipments from the petitioner to construct a mobile tower in the property of the sixth respondent. Due to certain disputes between the respondents 5 and 6, the sixth respondent is not permitting the petitioner to remove its equipments from his property. Even though the petitioner has submitted Exts. P3 and P4 complaints before the respondents 2 and 3, no action has been taken in the matter. The petitioner's apprehension is that the sixth respondent would cause physical harm to them if they attempt to remove the equipments. Hence, the writ petition.

3. Heard; the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents 4 and 5.

4. The learned counsel for the fifth respondent submitted that, they have no objection to the petitioner removing their equipments from the sixth res