P.Nagavel, v. The Inspector General Of
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.09.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR W.P.(MD) No.16943 of 2017 P.Nagavel : Petitioner -Vs1.The Inspector of Police, South Zone, Madurai.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruvadanai, Ramanathapuram District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Thondi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
5.Kottudurai 6.Dharmaraj 7.Sakthi 8.Muneeswaran 9.Sandru @ Ganesan 10.Murugesan : Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.09.2017 and consequently, direct the fourth respondent to take appropriate action on petitioner's complaint and to give police protection to the petitioner and his family members life and limb. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthukumar For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Baskara Pandian 1 to 4 Special Government Pleader.
O R D E R
This writ petition is for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4, to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.09.2017 and consequently, direct the fourth respondent to take appropriate action on petitioner's complaint and to give police protection to the petitioner and his family members.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
2.The petitioner states that he has purchased the property on 14.06.2016. It is the case of the petitioner that some private individuals, namely, respondents 5 to 10 in this writ petition are not allowing the petitioner to put up a construction in the property purchased by him in 2016. It is in the said circumstances, he further states that he was threatened by the private respondents and hence he should be given protection not only to put up a construction in his property, but also to his life and limb of the petitioner and his family members. 3.
When the petitioner admits that some individuals namely, the private respondents are preventing him from putting up construction in the property purchased by him, the petitioner has to approach the Civil Court for appropriate order of injunction, restraining the private individuals from interfering with the possession or lawful enjoyment, since, further action can be taken by the official respondents only on the basis of an enquiry as to the title and lawful enjoyment of the property in question. 4.This Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. It is more or less in the nature of enforcing the petitioner's right over the property alleged to have been purchased by him recently.
5.The Writ Petition is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to work out his remedy by filing a suit for appropriate relief. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Inspector of Police, South Zone, Madurai.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruvadanai, Ramanathapuram District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Thondi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
+1cc to Mr.S.MUTHUKUMAR,Advocate,SR.77882 +1cc to M/S.Special Government Pleader,SR. 77937 W.P.(MD) No. 16943 of 2017 07.09.2017 TSG KK/SKN RSK/SAR1/22.09.2017/ 2P- 7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/