Baby Thyparambil vs The Corporation Of Kochi

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 1079 Ker
Judgement Date : 16 July, 2025

Kerala High Court

Baby Thyparambil vs The Corporation Of Kochi on 16 July, 2025

                                                          2025:KER:52597

               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:
                                                          2025:KER:52597

W.P.(C.) No.1703 of 2018
                                 -2-




                            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 2025:KER:52597 W.P.(C.) No.1703 of 2018 -3- 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 2025:KER:52597 W.P.(C.) No.1703 of 2018 -4- 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