Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ASHOK BHUSHAN, CJ, A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J
FIROSKHAN A – Appellant
Versus
ANOOP – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 11347/2016
Property - Writ Petition - Civil Court Orders - Summary: The court highlighted civil court jurisdiction over property disputes and affirmed police duty to maintain order, emphasizing proper legal channels in property rights adjudications.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought police protection against threats from respondents after a disputed property transaction involving a fifth respondent, which included a complaint regarding trespassing and intimidation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there have been registered crimes against the fifth respondent and civil court orders in play, determining no immediate threat exists, with police oversight mandated.
Issues: The primary issue revolved around whether the petitioner required police protection due to threats arising from a property dispute.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that rights to property should be adjudicated by a competent civil court, with a police obligation to maintain law and order during such disputes.
Final Decision: Writ petition disposed with directives on law and order maintenance.
JUDGMENT
Ashok Bhushan, CJ Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Attorney. No notice is being issued to respondents 4 to 8 in view of the order which is being passed.
2. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking police protection from the threat of respondents 4 to 8. Petitioner's case is that 5th respondent has executed a sale deed in favour of 2.25 Ares of property for a sale consideration of ₹1.55 crores and the property was mortgaged with Axis Bank. The 5th respondent took some time to hand over the title deeds. It is submitted that the 5th respondent also entered into some transaction with another person in respect of the same property, for which one Sri.Jaganathan has already lodged a complaint against the 5th respondent. Thereafter on 13.3.2016, the 4th respondent trespassed into the building and threatened the petitioner. Hence, a complaint was filed against respondents 4 and 5.
3. Learned State Attorney, after obtaining instructions, submits that two crimes have already been registered against the 5th respondent and the 5th respondent has also approached a civil court and has obtained an order. The petitioner has also appeared in the civil court and also obtained an order in his favour. It was stated that the police authorities have directed and warned both the parties to act in compliance of the order of the civil court. As on date, there is no threat to law and order situation and the police is keeping a vigil.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made, we are of the view that in so far as the right to use the property and entitlement of the same, parties have to get their rights adjudicated from the competent civil court. However, respondents 2 and 3 shall ensure that law and order is maintained.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
