Chacko Mathew Vs. Sub Inspector of Police - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1097677
CourtKerala High Court
Decided OnNov-19-2013
JudgeHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN
AppellantChacko Mathew
RespondentSub Inspector of Police
Excerpt:
in the high court of kerala at ernakulam present: the honourable mr.justice s.siri jagan & the honourable mr. justice k.ramakrishnan tuesday, the19h day of november201328th karthika, 1935 wp(c).no. 25757 of 2013 (t) ---------------------------- petitioner(s): ------------------------ chacko mathew,aged75years, s/o. chacko, residing at vadakkeparambil house, rajendra prasad colony p.o.,erumely north, kottayam district, pin-686 513. by advs.sri.g.hariharan sri.praveen.h. respondent(s): ---------------------------- 1. sub inspector of police, mundakkayam police station, mundakkayam, kottayam district-686 513.2. the deputy superintendent of police, kanjirappally, kottayam district, pin-686 507.3. reji v.mathew, s/o. mathew, tax consultant, athiyalil plaza, 3rd floor, mundakkayam, kottayam district-686 513. r1 & r2 by senior government pleader sri.p.mohammed shah r3 by advs. sri.premchand r.nair smt.anna thomas sri.raza m fazal sri.j.krishnakumar (adoor) this writ petition (civil) having been finally heard on1911-2013, the court on the same day delivered the following: kss wp(c).no. 25757 of 2013 (t) ----------------------------------------- appendix petitioner(s)' exhibits: --------------------------------------- p1 : copy of the property tax receipt dtd.3.10.2013 issued by the mundakkayam grama panchayat in the name of the petitioner for the house and property. p2 : copy of the demand notice issued by the kerala state electricity board in the name of the petitioner. p3 : copy of the written request dtd.12.9.2013 made by the petitioner before the1t respondent. respondent(s)' exhibits: -------------------------------------------- r3(a): copy of the receipt evidencing the payment of the property tax to the erumelly village dtd. 20/12/2012. r3(b): copy of the medical report issued from the cmc hospital, vellore dtd. 09/05/2013. /true copy/ p.s.tojudge kss s.siri jagan & k.ramakrishnan, jj.================== w.p.(c).no. 25757 of 2013 ================== dated this the 19th day of november, 2013 judgment s.siri jagan, j.: the petitioner is a senior citizen aged 75 years. he is a widower for the last 26 years. he has seven children. the eldest son expired. daughters have been given in marriage and are living separately. the 3rd respondent is the third son of the petitioner, who is self-employed as a tax consultant. the petitioner alleges that the 3rd respondent is interfering with the peaceful living of the petitioner. the 3rd respondent and his wife are harassing the petitioner and preventing the petitioner from taking income from the usufructs in the properties comprised in re-survey no.143/11 in erumely north village, which is owned and possessed by the petitioner. the petitioner alleges that the 3rd respondent and his wife are forcing the petitioner to execute a settlement deed of the properties in favour of the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent is threatening the petitioner by physical assault, if he does not do so. under the above circumstances, w.p.c.25757/13 - :2. :- the petitioner approached the police for appropriate protection. since the 1st respondent has not chosen to respond to the request of the petitioner, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following relief: "issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the 1st and 2nd respondents to provide proper and adequate police protection to the life of the petitioner and his family members from the threatened attack of the 3rd respondent." 2. the 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit taking the stand that the 3rd respondent is a kidney patient and he is not in anyway harassing the petitioner. it is further submitted that the 3rd respondent has no intention to cause any harm either to the person of the petitioner or his properties. this is recorded. if contrary to the above undertaking any incident occurs, the 1st respondent shall provide adequate protection to the petitioner from any prejudicial action of the 3rd respondent. the writ petition is disposed of as above. sd/- s.siri jagan, judge sd/- sdk+ k.ramakrishnan, judge ///true copy/// p.a. to judge w.p.c.25757/13 - :3. :-
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE19H DAY OF NOVEMBER201328TH KARTHIKA, 1935 WP(C).No. 25757 of 2013 (T) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ CHACKO MATHEW,AGED75YEARS, S/O. CHACKO, RESIDING AT VADAKKEPARAMBIL HOUSE, RAJENDRA PRASAD COLONY P.O.,ERUMELY NORTH, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 513. BY ADVS.SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUNDAKKAYAM POLICE STATION, MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 513.

2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 507.

3. REJI V.MATHEW, S/O. MATHEW, TAX CONSULTANT, ATHIYALIL PLAZA, 3RD FLOOR, MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 513. R1 & R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.MOHAMMED SHAH R3 BY ADVS. SRI.PREMCHAND R.NAIR SMT.ANNA THOMAS SRI.RAZA M FAZAL SRI.J.KRISHNAKUMAR (ADOOR) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON1911-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WP(C).No. 25757 of 2013 (T) ----------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: --------------------------------------- P1 : COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT DTD.3.10.2013 ISSUED BY THE MUNDAKKAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE HOUSE AND PROPERTY. P2 : COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER. P3 : COPY OF THE WRITTEN REQUEST DTD.12.9.2013 MADE BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE1T RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: -------------------------------------------- R3(A): COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF THE PROPERTY TAX TO THE ERUMELLY VILLAGE DTD. 20/12/2012. R3(B): COPY OF THE MEDICAL REPORT ISSUED FROM THE CMC HOSPITAL, VELLORE DTD. 09/05/2013. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TOJUDGE Kss S.SIRI JAGAN & K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JJ.

================== W.P.(C).No. 25757 of 2013 ================== Dated this the 19th day of November, 2013

JUDGMENT

S.Siri Jagan, J.: The petitioner is a senior citizen aged 75 years. He is a widower for the last 26 years. He has seven children. The eldest son expired. Daughters have been given in marriage and are living separately. The 3rd respondent is the third son of the petitioner, who is self-employed as a tax consultant. The petitioner alleges that the 3rd respondent is interfering with the peaceful living of the petitioner. The 3rd respondent and his wife are harassing the petitioner and preventing the petitioner from taking income from the usufructs in the properties comprised in re-survey No.143/11 in Erumely North Village, which is owned and possessed by the petitioner. The petitioner alleges that the 3rd respondent and his wife are forcing the petitioner to execute a settlement deed of the properties in favour of the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent is threatening the petitioner by physical assault, if he does not do so. Under the above circumstances, w.p.c.25757/13 - :

2. :- the petitioner approached the police for appropriate protection. Since the 1st respondent has not chosen to respond to the request of the petitioner, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following relief: "Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the 1st and 2nd respondents to provide proper and adequate Police Protection to the life of the petitioner and his family members from the threatened attack of the 3rd respondent." 2. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit taking the stand that the 3rd respondent is a kidney patient and he is not in anyway harassing the petitioner. It is further submitted that the 3rd respondent has no intention to cause any harm either to the person of the petitioner or his properties. This is recorded. If contrary to the above undertaking any incident occurs, the 1st respondent shall provide adequate protection to the petitioner from any prejudicial action of the 3rd respondent. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Sd/- sdk+ K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge w.p.c.25757/13 - :

3. :-