Antony George v. The Sub Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 36608 of 2015 (A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
----------------------
1. ANTONY GEORGE, S/O.K.B.GEORGE, KATTUNKATHIYIL HOUSE, KAVALAMKODAM, VAYALAR EAST, CHERTHALA, ALLAPPUZHA 688 524.
2. K.EASWARAN, S/O.KANDASWAMY GOUNDER, 1/118 PALRAJ COUNTER THOTTAM C, ARTHANARIPALAYAM, R.PONNAPPURAM, POLLACHY, COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU 62 002.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN SRI.S.SUDHEESHKAR SRI.E.B.SHIVANANDAN SRI.NIDHI BALACHANDRAN DR.K.S.NIZAR RESPONDENT(S):
------------------------
1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNUTHY P.O, THRISSUR - 680 651.
2. K.NANDAKUMAR, KAIPPALLY HOUSE, AYYAPPANKAVU PO, KOZHUKKULLY 680 752.
R1 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PJ
WP(C).No. 36608 of 2015 (A) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1TRUE COPY OF THE PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 1.9.2015 P2TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT DATED 12.8.2015 P3TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF SCHEDULE OF THE MACHINERIES P4TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 7.10.2015 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION P5TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19.10.2015 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION P6TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED 3.11.2015 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION P7TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 04.11.2015 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.
/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ
ASHOK BHUSHAN, CJ & A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J -------------------------------------------------------------- W.P(C). No. 36608 of 2015 --------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2015
JUDGMENT
Shaffique, J Petitioner has approached this Court seeking police protection on the allegation that the second respondent is not permitting the petitioner to remove the machineries which had been brought to the property belonging to the second respondent. It is stated that the petitioner had entered into a lease agreement with the second respondent for installing the unit. However, the unit could not be started on account of the fact that the property is described as 'Nilam' and the petitioner was unable to get necessary permission from the competent authorities. When attempt was made to remove the machinery to another place, it was obstructed by the second respondent. Though the petitioner submitted complaint before the police seeking necessary protection for removing the machineries, police has not taken any action in the matter. Hence this writ petition is filed, seeking the aforesaid relief.
W.P(c).36608/15
2. Learned Government Pleader on instructions would submit that police have made enquiry into the complaint and second respondent submitted that he is entitled for a lien over the machinery since certain amounts are due to him.
3. Such being the fact, we do not think that police can interfere in the matter. The remedy of the petitioner is to approach the civil court and seek appropriate relief in the matter.
With the above observation, this writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE sou.7/12/15