CHANDRIKA AMMA Vs. SARAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have come to this Court seeking issue of directions under Art.226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 6 and 7 to afford protection to the petitioners for execution of Ext. P1 conditional order issued by the Sub Divisional Magistrate. It is submitted that respondents 1 to 5 are raising illegal obstructions against the attempt of the petitioners to comply with Ext. P1 order.

(2.) The petitioners are the landlords of a building. Respondents 1 to 5 are tenants of different portions of the same building. There are disputes between the landlords and the tenants. There are litigations between them. Interim orders have been passed by the civil court directing maintenance of status quo and injunction against demolition of buildings pending disposal of the suit. However, the learned Magistrate had made it clear that the order of injunction shall not stand in the way of action being taken under S.133 CrPC.

(3.) It is further submitted that another person - not the landlords, had approached the Sub Divisional Magistrate under S.133 CrPC demanding demolition of the buildings and abating threat of public nuisance. He alleged that the buildings are likely to fall and thereby cause danger to the local inhabitants. The Sub Divisional Magistrate had issued Ext. P1. That is a conditional order. Admittedly the same has not been made absolute so far. According to the petitioner, they are not interested in continuing with the said proceedings. They want to comply with Ext. P1 order. Notwithstanding the fact that it is only a conditional order, they say that they want to comply with the order. Respondents 1 to 5 are illegally obstructing the attempt of the petitioners to comply with Ext. P1 order. It is hence that they have come to this Court claiming issue of directions under Art.226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 6 and 7.