IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
ANNAMMA CHACKO – Appellant
Versus
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE IDUKKI – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 8794 OF 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the need for police protection against trespass on property. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's inability to intervene in ongoing civil disputes. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. the verdict of maintaining law and order as absolute. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
Petitioner seeks for police protection against any waste or trespass by the 3rd respondent.
2. Petitioner claims to be the owner of 1.87 Acres of land situated in Survey No.110/5 and 110/10 of Kalkoonthal village, Udumbanchola Taluk. Due to certain civil disputes that arose with the third respondent, petitioner filed O.S.No.426/2024 before the Munsiff Court, Kattapana, seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction. By Ext.P3 order dated 15.11.2024, in I.A.No.1/2024 in O.S.No.426/24; an interim injunction was granted. Despite the said interim injunction, when the petitioner went out of station, the 3rd respondent allegedly trespassed into her property and committed damages. A complaint was lodged before the Police. According to the petitioner, despite the above complaint, no action has been initiated, and therefore, she has approached this Court through this writ petition.
3. Despite service of notice on the 3rd respondent, none has appeared.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader.
5. On a perusal of the pleadings in the writ petition and after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel on either side, it is evident that a civil dispute is pending between the parties. Since the Police cannot interfere in a civil dispute, the request for directions against trespass, and commission of waste on the property cannot be granted. Notwithstanding the above, it needs to be noted that an interim order was passed by this Court on 14.03.2025, directing the second respondent to maintain law and order in the petitioner’s locality without interfering any civil dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent. Considering the entire circumstances, I am of the view that the said interim order can be made absolute.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to maintain law and order in the petitioner’s locality, without interfering in any civil disputes between the petitioner and the third respondent.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
sd/-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.