IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2008 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1929 MFA.No. 741 of 2002(E) ---------------------- ( OA.99/1998 of FOREST TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE ) APPELLANT/APPLICANT: ------------------------------------ HAMSA, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O.KUNHAMI HAJI, PALATHINGAL HOUSE, EDATHUNATTUKARA AMSOM, DESOM, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.G.PARAMESWARA PANICKER ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CUSTODIAN OF VESTED FOREST, ARANAYA BHAVAR, OLAVAKKODE, PALAKKAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. SHRI M.P. PRAKASH. THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B. KOSHY & K.T. SANKARAN, JJ. ................................................................................... M.F.A.NO. 741 OF 2002 ................................................................................... Dated this the 18th March, 2008 J U D G M E N T Koshy, J.: Contending that 34 acres of land in possession of the appellant was interfered with by the forest officials, the appellant herein approached the Forest Tribunal under Section 8 of the Kerala Private Forest (Vesting and Assignment )Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') for a declaration that the petition schedule property is not a forest and not vested with the Government. It is also contended that even if it is a private forest, the appellant is entitled for exemption under sections 3 (2) and 3(3) of the Act . In the Commissioner's report, it has been stated that different species of trees such as Maruthu, Irul, Vella Nava, Venga, Rose Wood, Vaka and Cashew trees are found in the petition schedule property. 2. In Ext.C5 Commissioner's report, it has been stated that the number of cashew trees in the petition schedule property is 70 to 80 and 20% of them were aged 15 to 18 years and the remaining ones were aged about 25 years, which shows that the entire cashew trees were planted after 10.05.1971, the appointed day. The Commissioner also found that there were no rubber trees. It has also been reported that apart from a thatched shed and a raised M.F.A.NO. 741 OF 2002 2 mudbed, there was no evidence of existence of any building in the property. The Commissioner has also found that one side of the property is a vested forest. The Tribunal found that even if the lease deed produced by the petitioner/appellant is accepted as correct, the petitioner was unable to show that he was in possession of the property. There was no evidence to show that the property in question was a cultivated one on the appointed day and the burden of proof that the petition schedule property was not a private forest or that they are entitled to get exemption under Sections 3(2) and 3(3) of the Act was not discharged. Hence on the basis of the evidence on record, the Tribunal had arrived at the conclusion that the applicant/appellant has failed to establish or prove his case. We fully concur with the findings of the Tribunal. Therefore, no interference is called for. The appeal is dismissed. J.B. KOSHY, JUDGE. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE. lk M.F.A.NO. 741 OF 2002 3 J.B. KOSHY & K.T. SANKARAN, JJ. ........................................................ M.F.A. No. 741 OF 2002 ......................................................... Dated this the 18th March, 2008 J U D G M E N T