CP THOMAS Vs. DEPUTY SUERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court seeking the following prayers:

(2.) BRIEFLY put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner had purchased an extent of 30 cents of property vide Ext.P1. He had also purchased another extent of 30 cents adjoining the property covered by Ext.P1 vide Ext.P2 in the name of his sister. The second respondent is the son of the person in whose name Ext.P2 is taken. Petitioner's sister in whose name Ext.P2 is taken died in 1999. After the death of the parents the second respondent never raised any claim in respect of the properties. Petitioner entered into an agreement with an advertising company for installation of a hoarding in the property covered by Ext.P2 document. According to the petitioner, the first respondent police officer has interfered in the matter. The case of the petitioner is that it is a civil dispute between the petitioner and the second respondent in respect of the property covered by Ext.P2.