Mrs.Surya Gandhi v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04.03.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Mrs.Surya Gandhi

...Petitioner

Versus

1.The Superintendent of Police Thiruvannamalai District.

2.The Inspector of Police Vandavasi South Police Station, Vandavasi, Thiruvannamalai District.

3.M.Pachaiyappan

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st and 2nd respondent to consider petitioner's representation dated 12.11.2024 and 14.11.2024 to provide police protection against 3rd respondent and their henchmen from disturbing petitioner's legal possession as against the court decree and inducing their henchmen for preventing the petitioner the workmen cleaning and putting compound wall on petitioner's land.

For Petitioner : MrC.B.Santhosh Kumar For R1 & R2 : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R3 : Mr.V.R.Appaswamee

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking police protection for the petitioner at the hands of the third respondent and his henchmen while the petitioner is enjoying her property.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

3. The petitioner owned property, comprised in T.S.No.200/1, admeasuring 15 cents situated at Vandavasi Taluk, Vandavasi, by way of registered sale deed vide document No. 1409 of 2007. However, the third respondent disturbed the peaceful possession of the petitioner and as such, the petitioner was constrained to file a suit in O.S.No.195 of 2007 before the District Munsif Court, Vandavasi, for declaration and injunction. In the meanwhile, the third respondent also filed a suit in O.S.No.125 of 2007 before the District Munsif Court, Vandavasi, for permanent injunction. Both suits were tried together and the suit filed by the petitioner was decreed and the suit filed by the third respondent was

dismissed by a Judgment and Decree dated 30.08.2024. Even though the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the property, the third respondent has to disturb the same. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation seeking provide police protection at the hands of the third respondent.

4. In view of the above, the second respondent is directed to conduct enquiry on the representation submitted by the petitioner, after issuance of notice to the petitioner and the third respondent, and pass orders to provide police protection, in the light of the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.125 & 195 of 2007, dated 30.08.2007, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs.

04.03.2025 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order Lpp

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

Lpp To 1.The Superintendent of Police Thiruvannamalai District.

2.The Inspector of Police Vandavasi South Police Station, Vandavasi, Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

04.03.2025