P.Haridoss v. The State Rep By, The Superintendent Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN P.Haridoss ... Petitioner Vs.

1.

The State represented by The Superintendent of Police, Vandavasi - Kanchipuram Road, Thaiyar Kullam, Collector Office Campus, Kanchipuram - 631 501.

2.

The Inspector of Police, C-5, Oragadam Police Station, Oragadam, Kanchipuram District - 602 105.

3.

Manoj 4.

Murthy 5.

Thirumal 6.

Sampath 7.

Illamalli ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to enquire the entire issues relating to the complaint of the petitioner dated 26.03.2025 and give police protection to lay boundary wall on his land to an extent of 17 cents in S.No.345/27, Mathur Village, Sriperumandur Taluk, Kanchipuram District - 602 105, as per measurement given by the Advocate Commissioner report dated 18.09.2018. 1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.S.T.Varadarajalu For Respondents : Dr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 and R2

O R D E R

The Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to enquire the entire issues relating to the complaint of the petitioner dated 26.03.2025 and give police protection to lay boundary wall on his land admeasuring 17 cents in S.No.345/27, Mathur Village, Sriperumandur Taluk, Kanchipuram District - 602 105, as per measurement given in the Advocate Commissioner report dated 18.09.2018.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and perused the materials available on record.

3. Since no adverse order is passed as against respondents 3 to 7 affecting their interest, notice to those respondents is hereby dispensed with.

2/5

4. It is seen from the records that there was a property dispute pending between the petitioner and the private respondents 3 to 7 herein, which is purely civil in nature. The petitioner herein had already approached the civil Court and filed a suit in O.S.No.179 of 2012 before the District Munsif Court, Sriperumandur seeking permanent injunction restraining any person from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner's property, which came to be dismissed on 14.12.2022 on the ground that the petitioner has not proved that as to how the boundaries of the suit property were obstructed by the private respondents.

Having failed in his attempt to get a decree from the civil Court, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents-Police to give Police protection to lay boundary wall in his land as per measurements given by the surveyor and also based on Advocate Commissioner's report. When things stood as above, the Writ Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry regarding the same dispute and it is for the petitioner to workout his remedy before the competent civil Court in a manner known to law. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to the grant the relief sought for by the petitioner in the present petition.

5. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. However, it is open to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the competent Civil Court if he so desires. 25.07.2025 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No ms To 1.

The Superintendent of Police, Vandavasi - Kanchipuram Road, Thaiyar Kullam, Collector Office Campus, Kanchipuram - 631 501.

2.

The Inspector of Police, C-5, Oragadam Police Station, Oragadam, Kanchipuram District - 602 105.

3.

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

4/5

P.VELMURUGAN, J ms 25.07.2025 5/5