SARMILA Vs. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has a sad tale of woes to narrate. She had an item of property measuring about 4 cents. That property was trespassed upon and was reduced to the possession of the 3rd respondent. THE petitioner went to court with a suit for recovery of possession. Ext.P1 judgment was passed in the said proceedings. THE petitioner's prayer for recovery was allowed. THE petitioner took out execution and by Ext.P2 order, through court the property was recovered from the possession of the 3rd respondent and was entrusted to the petitioner.

(2.) OBSTRUCTION to enjoyment of property continued. The petitioner came to this Court seeking directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to afford police protection to her. That petition was disposed of by Ext.P3 judgment. The petitioner was directed to approach the competent civil court and seek appropriate relief.

(3.) THE learned Government Pleader after taking instructions from respondents 1 and 2 submits that respondents 1 and 2 are now convinced that O.S.No.194 of 2010 has been disposed of finally in favour of the petitioner and that judgment and decree have now become final without challenge. In these circumstances, the police shall afford adequate protection to the petitioner to enjoy the property delivered to her under Ext.P2 and in respect of which, she has secured the decree in O.S.No.194 of 2010.