IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2008 / 20TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 25485 of 2007(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ N.L.BALAKRISHNAN, S/O.M.NARAYANAN, LAKSHMI NARAYANAN, CHEMPAZHANTHY. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.AHAMMED SRI.THOUFEEK AHAMED RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAZHAKKOOTTAM, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. 2. B.N.JAYAKRISHNAN, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, PANATTUVILA VEEDU, MUKKILKADA JUNCTION, POWDIKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL. BY ADV. SRI.S.SUDHISH KUMAR FOR R2 SRI.SIBI KARUN FOR R2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.25485/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE GIFT DEED EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 4.10.1999. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE RELEASE DEE NO.4523/2000 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19.12.2000. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 20.3.2006. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT NO.165/2006 FROM 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17.5.2007. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT NO.221 FROM 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17.5.2007. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C). No.25485 OF 2007 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner seeks police protection to his life from the alleged threat from the part of the 2nd respondent, who is his son. While admitting the writ petition, this Court passed an interim order in favour of the petitioner. Though the 2nd respondent appeared, he has chosen not to file any counter affidavit. Having regard to the averments in the writ petition, we are satisfied that the petitioner is entitled to get protection. So, the writ petition is disposed of maintaining the said interim order. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) ps