L.BERNABAS Vs. STATE OF KREALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

(2.) BRIEFLY put, the case of the petitioners is as follows: Petitioners are husband and wife. The first petitioner is an Ayurveda Doctor who retired from the government service. Petitioners are residing with their 3 major girl children and the children are still continuing their studies. The second petitioner entered into an agreement for sale of 2 Ares and 2 sq links of property in Re-Sy. No.357/11 of Kulathummal Village with the 7th respondent and when the 7th respondent violated the terms and the agreement for sale the 2nd petitioner approached the Munsiff Court, Nedumangadu and filed OS No.43/2008 seeking decree for specific performance of contract. As per Ext.P1 the suit was decreed and specific performance was allowed on condition of deposit of the balance sale consideration. Ext.P1 decree also executed after the deposit of the sale proceeds. The learned Munsiff has executed the deed as evidenced by Ext.P2. In the course of the execution of Ext.P1 decree after the execution of the deed the court ordered delivery of possession. As per Ext.P3 order the Court directed the 6th respondent to grant adequate police protection to the Amin to effect delivery of the scheduled property. As per Ext.P4, delivery of the property was effected and the Amin has prepared a report and kachit, the same was submitted before the Munsiff Court, Nedumangad. The 2nd petitioner has also submitted Ext.P5 kachit before the Court acknowledging the receipt of delivery. The 2nd petitioner is paying tax. To the surprise of the petitioners when the Ist petitioner went to the scheduled property on 3.9.2012 it was found that the lock was broke open and respondents 7 to 9 committed trespass and damaged the articles of the petitioners. The offence was committed by respondents 7 to 9 on 31.8.2012. Immediately the Ist petitioner informed the matter to the police and on the statement recorded from the Ist petitioner Ext.P7 crime No.968/2012 was registered by the Kattakkada police for the offence under Section 188, 447, 427 read with Section 34 IPC. The petitioners went to the property after the registration of the crime. Respondents 7 to 9 came to know this and immediately they came to the property with dangerous weapon and attempted to attack the petitioners. The petitioners are aged and law abiding citizens. The 7th respondent is now demanding the property back failing which the petitioners are threatened with dire consequences. The petitioners have 3 major girl children and the respondents openly declared that petitioners will not be allowed to live peacefully with the children unless the property is transferred in the name of the 7th respondent. The petitioners and their children's life are in danger. Even after submitting Ext.P8 complaints before respondents 2 to 6 as evidenced by receipts no action was taken. Hence, this petition for a direction to respondents 2 to 6 to grant adequate protection to the life and the property of the petitioners. A Counter affidavit is filed by the 8th respondent to which the petitioners filed reply affidavit.

(3.) AS far as the first prayer, viz., protection for the life of the petitioners and family is concerned, we direct that on the petitioners complaining to the 6th respondent of any threat from respondents 7 to 9, the 6th respondent will look into the same and if the complaint is found genuine, he will provide protection to the petitioners and three daughters as against respondents 7 to 9. We make it clear that protection is for life and not for enjoyment of property.