Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THOMAS ABRAHAM, S/O. LATE KUNJUMON versus SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


THOMAS ABRAHAM, S/O. LATE KUNJUMON v. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE - WP(C) No. 13947 of 2007(I) [2007] RD-KL 16036 (18 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 13947 of 2007(I)

1. THOMAS ABRAHAM, S/O. LATE KUNJUMON
... Petitioner

Vs

1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
... Respondent

2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,

3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

5. EALIAMMA KURIEN,

6. ALEX KURIEN, S/O. LATE BABY,

7. BABY, S/O. LATE KUNJUCHERUKEN,

8. RAMESH, S/O. KOCHUCHERUKKAN,

9. SURESH, S/O. KUTTY,

For Petitioner :SRI.P.HARIDAS

For Respondent :SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR The Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID

Dated :18/08/2007

O R D E R

K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR &

HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.

W.P.(C) No.13947 of 2007-I Dated 18th August, 2007.

JUDGMENT

Balakrishnan Nair, J.

The petitioner is having a small plot of land. Alleging that respondents 5 to 9 are trying to cut open a pathway through his property, the petitioner has moved the civil court and obtained an interim injunction. The petitioner submits, the party respondents are disobeying the injunction and also trying to physically harm him. So, he has preferred Ext.P3 representation before the Chief Minister with copy to the police. Since the police did not extend any helping hand, this writ petition is filed, seeking appropriate reliefs.

2. The learned counsel appearing for respondents 5, 6 and 9 submitted that the said respondents will not violate the interim order of the civil court and they have no plan whatsoever to cause any physical harm to the petitioner. The learned Government Pleader, upon instructions submitted that there is some civil dispute between the parties. But there is no threat to the life of the petitioner. WP(C) No. 13947/07

3. If the injunction is violated, the petitioner's remedy is to move the court which granted the injunction. But, if there is any threat to his life, the petitioner may bring it to the notice of respondents 3 and 4. In that event they will look into the same and take appropriate action in accordance with law. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE.

HARUN-UL-RASHID,JUDGE.

nm.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.