Case Note & Summary
The State of Kerala and another appealed against the judgment of the Kerala High Court in M.F.A No. 1247 of 2000 dated 18.09.2007, which allowed the appeal of the respondents (Padalodiyil Mary Antony and others) and set aside the order of the Forest Tribunal dated 22.07.2000 in O.A No. 46/99. The respondents had filed the petition before the Forest Tribunal under Section 8 of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 (KPF Act) seeking a declaration that 1 acre 30 cents of land in survey No. 1293 of Ayyankunnu village, Tellichery Taluk, Kannur district (schedule property) is not a private forest as defined under the KPF Act. The respondents relied on a Commissioner's report in a civil case to show that the schedule property was under cultivation when the KPF Act came into force, and also that a certificate of purchase had been issued in their favour by the Land Tribunal under the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963. The appellants opposed the application, contending that the schedule property is a private forest vested in the State Government under the KPF Act. The High Court, relying on the local inspection report dated 08.06.1998, found that the schedule property was under cultivation with cashew and rubber trees more than 30 to 40 years old, that no forest trees were found, and that it was not covered by the Madras Preservation of Private Forest Act, 1949. The High Court recorded a finding of fact that the schedule property is not a private forest under the KPF Act. The Supreme Court, hearing the appeal, found no merit in the State's appeal and dismissed it, holding that there was no good ground to interfere with the High Court's judgment. The Court noted that the High Court had properly appreciated the materials on record, including the local inspection report, and that the finding of fact was based on evidence. The appeal was dismissed without any order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Land Law - Private Forest - Definition - Section 2(f) of Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 - Land under cultivation with cashew and rubber trees for 30-40 years, no forest trees, and not covered by Madras Preservation of Private Forest Act, 1949 - Held that such land is not a private forest under the KPF Act (Paras 3-4). B) Evidence - Local Inspection Report - Commissioner's Report - Reliance on - High Court's appreciation of evidence - Finding of fact based on local inspection report showing cultivation - Held that no interference is warranted with such finding of fact (Para 4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the schedule property is a 'private forest' as defined under the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971, and whether the High Court's finding of fact that it is not a private forest warrants interference.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's judgment that the schedule property is not a private forest under the KPF Act. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Private forest definition
- Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act
- 1971
- Section 8
- Burden of proof
- Cultivation as exclusion
