SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Ker) 135

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J.
C.J. Mathews - Petitioner
Versus
District Collector, Ernakulam – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 34797 OF 2024
Decided On : 05-02-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Shri.M.Dinesh, Shri.Suresh Kumar C.G.
For the Respondent: Shri.K.B. Arunkumar, Smt.P.Rani Diothima, Smt.P.V.Radhamani, Smt.Rose Ann Babu, Gp Smt Preetha K K

The court emphasized that municipal authorities must act promptly on complaints related to dangerous trees threatening citizen safety, especially regarding vulnerable individuals, as mandated under the Kerala Municipalities Act.

Headnote:(A) Kerala Municipalities Act, 1994 - Sections 412, 427 and 428 - Writ petition seeking directions to municipal authorities for action against dangerous trees adjacent to petitioner’s property - Delays in executing orders and potential danger to life and property cited - The court stresses the protection of the rights of elderly citizens against bureaucratic inaction. (Paras 2, 11, 14)

(B) Right to life and property - Ensuring safety of elderly citizens - Failure to act on complaints of dangerous trees poses significant risks - Bureaucracy mandates a duty to act promptly on public safety issues to uphold justice. (Paras 2, 10, 14)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner, a 92-year-old man, requested the municipality to remove dangerous trees threatening his property for several years without satisfactory action, despite official orders. Valid complaints and inquiries were ignored, creating ongoing hazards.

Findings of Court:
The court ordered immediate removal of the trees to ensure the safety of the petitioner, emphasizing bureaucratic responsibility.

Issues: The core issues involved the municipality's obligation to act on complaints regarding public safety and the rights of elderly citizens in property matters.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that immediate preventive measures regarding dangerous trees are mandatory under the Act without needing notice, prioritizing citizen safety over bureaucratic delays.

Result: Writ petition allowed; authorities directed to remove dangerous trees within one month.

Table of Content
1. property threat due to dangerous trees. (Para 2 , 4)
2. age is no barrier to justice. (Para 3)
3. petitioner's attempts to seek resolution. (Para 5 , 6)
4. authority's duty under kerala municipalities act. (Para 11)
5. non-action by authorities in serious matters. (Para 12 , 13)

JUDGMENT :

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

This Writ Petition (C) is filed seeking the following reliefs:

" (i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the 3rd respondent to implement Exhibit-P6 order issued by the 2nd respondent.

(ii) Issue an order or direction to the 3rd respondent to take effective steps to act in accordance with Section 412 , 427 and 428 of the Kerala Municipalities Act ."

[SIC]

2. Mr C.J. Mathews is a 92-year-old man. This nonagenarian has been fighting for a genuine cause for the last 9 years. He apprehends an imminent danger to his property and his residential building because of certain trees standing on the neighbouring property. Mr C.J. Mathews, a nonagenarian, is fighting at multiple levels of bureaucracy to have those trees cut and removed. Although he failed, he continues to fight, and at last he has knocked on the doors of this court. When I see the fighting mood of Mr C.J. Mathew, I recall the famous poem by the freedom fighter Sree T.S. Thirumumbu titled

(My Youth), written decades back. It will be better to extract the four lines of the above poem:

3. I am not attempting to translate these strong words of the legend Sree T.S. Thirumumb to English because I may not be able to convey the same in that spirit. But for the purpose of this judgment, I will say the brief message in it. The poet says that, greying my head is not my old age, and also not greying my head is not my youthfulness. The poet again states that counting the days from birth to the final day of life is not a measure of my youthfulness. The poet firmly says that the courage to never bow his head to the tyranny of bureaucracy during that time was his youthfulness. These words speak volumes. This message is intended for older adults and younger people: “age is no barrier to anything; it is a limitation you put on your mind and a lack of enthusiasm that holds you back”.

4. I will narrate the interesting story of Mr C.J. Mathew, the fighter, in brief first. Mr C.J. Mathews is a retired official of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, and he served the country for about three decades. He is the absolute owner and in possession of 4.2 cents of land comprised in Sy. No.660/1-4 of Rameswaram Village in Kochi Taluk. Petitioner resides in a building located on the said property. Ext.P1 is the tax receipt issued in the name of the petitioner from the Village Office, Rameswaram. Towards the southern side of the petitioner’s property, there is a vacant plot of 7 cents, which was previously owned by the father of the 5th respondent, Late Harihara Menon. After his death, the said property is in the possession and enjoyment of the 5th respondent. Ext.P2 is produced to show the sketch of the properties belonging to the petitioner and the 5th respondent. After the death of the 5th respondent’s father, it is the case of the petitioner that the 5th respondent and other co-owners of the property are not interested in taking care of the property, and thus the property is fully covered with trees, bushes and unwanted plants. The property is now a comfortable home for dangerous snakes and other reptiles, says C J Mathew. Two tall trees, comparatively bigger in size, are situated in the 5th respondent’s property near the boundary that demarcates the petitioner’s property and the 5th respondent’s property. Petitioner produced Exts.P3 and P4 photographs to show the present state of affairs of the property. In Ext.P4, the lie and nature of the petitioner’s residential house and the property belonging to the 5th respondent are visible. It is the case of the petitioner that the roots and branches of the trees in the property of the 5th respondent cause a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top