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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 57850

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BABY THYPARAMBIL – Appellant
Versus
THE CORPORATION OF KOCHI – Respondent
WP(C) 1703/2018



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 25TH ASHADHA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 1703 OF 2018 PETITIONER:

1 BABY THYPARAMBIL AGED 72 YEARS AGED 72, S/O. THOMAS, 43/891, THYPARAMBIL HOUSE, PRRA 42A, PALLICHAMBAYIL ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI 25.

BY ADVS.

SRI.K.R.VINOD SMT.M.S.LETHA RESPONDENTS:

1 THE CORPORATION OF KOCHI REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, PARK AVENUE ROAD, ERNAKULAM, 682 011.

2 THE SECRETARY THE CORPORATION OF KOCHI, CORPORATION OFFICE, PARK AVENUE ROAD, ERNAKULAM, 682 011.

3 THE HEALTH OFFICER COCHIN CORPORATION, CORPORATION OFFICE, PARK AVENUE ROAD, ERNAKULAM, 682 011.

BY ADVS.

SRI.JIBU P.THOMAS,SC,COCHIN CORPORATION SHRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

16.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated, this the 16th day of July, 2025 The petitioner has filed the captioned Writ Petition seeking to challenge Ext.P4 notice dated 22.12.2017 issued by the respondent Corporation by which the petitioner has been directed to cut and remove certain trees in his property. This Court notices that while admitting the Writ Petition, the operation of Ext.P4 was not stayed.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation.

3. The proceedings at Ext.P4 has been issued on the basis of a complaint filed by one Ratheesh Kumar as specifically noticed therein. When that be so, the petitioner ought to have impleaded the complainant before the Corporation also while filing the captioned Writ Petition. However, the petitioner has not chosen to implead the complainant before the Corporation in this Writ Petition. Therefore, the captioned Writ Petition cannot be maintained, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In such circumstances, this Writ Petition will stand dismissed.

Sd/-

HARISANKAR V. MENON JUDGE SKP/16-07 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1703/2018 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28.6.17 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10.11.17 SERVED ON THE PETITIONER ON 16.11.17.

EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 22.12.17.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE

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