Karthika v. The Superintendent Of Polcie,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06.03.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Karthika ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent of Police, Dharmapuri District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Marandalli Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

3. Viswanadhan ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 police to give adequate police protection to the petitioner's life and property to put up the wire fencing situated in survey No.190/2 extent of 4.95 cents, 256/5 extent of 0.65 cents, 256/1B extent of 1.60 cents total extent 7.20 cents situated at Periyanoor Village, Palacode Taluk, Rayakottai Sub Registrar Office, Krishnagiri District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 23.01.2024 and 05.03.2024. 1/4

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Sundarapandiyan For Respondents: Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1 & R3 Mr.R.Sethuvarayar for R3 *****

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for a direction, directing the respondents 1 and 2 police to give adequate police protection to the petitioner's life and property to put up the wire fencing situated in survey No.190/2 extent of 4.95 cents, 256/5 extent of 0.65 cents, 256/1B extent of 1.60 cents total extent 7.20 cents situated at Periyanoor Village, Palacode Taluk, Rayakottai Sub Registrar Office, Krishnagiri District.

2. The petitioner submitted a representation seeking police protection on the ground that the petitioner owned the property and in fact, her father filed a suit in O.S.No.72 of 1997 on the file of the SubCourt, Dharmapuri and it was transferred to the file of Additional District Judge, Dharmapuri and renumbered as O.S.No.105 of 2004 for partition and separate possession against the family members. The said suit was 2/4

decreed in favour of the petitioner. In pursuant to the said judgment and decree, the petitioner became absolute owner of the subject property and it was also confirmed by the judgment and decree in A.S.No.486 of 2005. Even then, the 3rd respondent is disturbing the possession and enjoyment of the property and also objecting for putting up any fencing in and around the suit property. Hence, the petitioner has lodged the complaint.

3. In view of the above, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.01.2024 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. With the above directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

06.03.2025 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order kmi 3/4

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

kmi To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Dharmapuri District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Marandalli Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

06.03.2025 4/4