THOMAS KURIAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BASANT,J. The petitioner, who has succeeded in securing Ext.P1 judgment and decree of permanent prohibitory injunction against respondents 3 to 8 and 13, has come to this Court virtually to complain about the violation of Ext.P1 judgment by respondents 3 to 13. He prays that police protection may be afforded to enable him to construct the boundary for his property.

(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the petitioner in detail. WE have perused the records. It appears to us to be evident that the precise dispute is where exactly the boundary must be constructed. It appears that the respondents are raising objections to the construction of the boundary. If that is so, it is in clear violation of the order in Ext.P1. It is for the petitioner to approach the Munsiff's Court to execute Ext.P1 judgment. WE do not think that it will be expedient or proper to permit the police to execute Ext.P1 order by issue of directions under Art.226 of the Constitution. The precise lie of the boundary will certainly have to be ascertained and the court which passed the decree is certainly better suited to execute the decree in a proper and effective manner.