IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2011 / 12TH MAGHA 1932 MFA.No. 19 of 2005(E) -------------------------- OA.11/1999 of FOREST TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT(S): ------------------ SASIDHARAN S/O. KRISHNAN, VADAKKEKARA, KEEZHOOR DESOM, ELEDATH, MADAMBA AMSOM, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST. BY ADVS. SRI.M.C.JOHN SRI.C.PRABIN BENNY RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CUSTODIAN OF VESTED FORESTS, OLAVAKODE CIRCLE, PALAKKAD. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.M.P.PRAKASH THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs R.BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ MFA NO:19 OF 2005 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st February, 2011. JUDGMENT Basant, J. The learned counsel for the appellant stipulates that he is seeking relief in the OA only with respect to 1.51 acres of land in Sy.Nos.70/3, 73/2 and 17/1. This is so notwithstanding the fact that in the OA schedule, the property was described to fall in Sy.Nos.17/1, 73/2, 17/2m 17/3, 17/4 and 70/8. 2. In the light of the controversy raised, the respondent was directed to file a forthright statement specifying whether they claim any portion of the property in the possession of the petitioner as a vested forest or not. In response to that, a statement has been filed by the second respondent and in the statement, paragraph-3 reads as follows: “The description of the Survey Nos. in the OA schedule would show that the dispute is in respect of land in Sy.No.17/1, 73/2, 17/2, 17/3, 17/4 and 70/8. However, in Annexure-B, the petitioner/appellant is stated to have land in Sy.No.70/3, 17/1 and 73/2. It is submitted that MFA No.19/2005 2 the land held by the petitioner in Sy.No.70/3, 73/2 and 17/1, having an extent of 1.51 acres is out side the vested forest and the appellant has no cause of action for filing the OA and the OA is liable to be dismissed. Instead of withdrawing the OA, the appellant/applicant cannot seek to record Annexure-A and B holding that OA schedule property is not a private forest, after vacating the order of the Forest Tribunal in OA No.11/1999. In the circumstances, it is submitted that the prayers made in the above I.A. is mischievous and is liable to be dismissed. The above MFA as well as the OA is liable to be dismissed as the applicant has no cause of action”. 3. We record that it is not disputed by the parties that 1.51 acres of land in the possession of the petitioner in Sy.Nos.70/3, 73/2 and 17/1 are not vested forest. The appellant does not claim any relief in respect of the other survey numbers shown in the schedule. 4. This appeal is in these circumstances allowed as agreed. It is declared that 1.51 acres of land in Sy.No.70/3, 73/2 and 17/1 in the possession of the appellant is not a vested forest. R.BASANT Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge css/