IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 14TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 25TH MAGHA 1929 MFA.No. 818 of 2002(B) ---------------------- OA.4/1996 of FOREST TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT: -------------------- PANAYIL RAGHAVAN @ KURUMAN RAGHAVAN, S/O. MATHAN, RESIDING AT IDINJAKOLLI, THRIKKAIPETTA, POST VYTHIRI, WAYANADU. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CUSTODIAN OF VESTED FORESTS, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. ------------------------------- M.F.A.NO.818 OF 2002 () & C.M.P.NO.4812 OF 2002 IN M.F.A.NO.818 OF 2002 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T KOSHY,J. This is a petition to condone the delay of 745 days in preferring the appeal. Appellant filed an application for a declaration that 5 acres of land in Re-survey No.216 of Thrikkaipetta Village of Vythiri Taluk is not a private forest vested with the Government. According to the petitioner, the land was cultivated with coffee, cardamom and pepper. After considering the commission report, forest tribunal had himself conducted an inspection. Both Forest tribunal and Commissioner found that the land in question is a virgin forest even though very few young coffee and pepper plants were seen grown in scattered area. Therefore, it was found that it was a private forest vested with the Government under Section 3(1) of the Act on the appointed day. Order is based on finding M.F.A.NO.818 OF 2002 () & C.M.P.NO.4812 OF 2002 IN M.F.A.NO.818 OF 2002 2 of facts and considering the evidence. Appeal was filed with more than two years delay along with a certificate from an Ayurvedic physician that appellant was under treatment for two months and an affidavit of Advocate saying that there was delay in searching out of the documents, we are of the opinion that no valid and satisfactory reasons are stated for condoning the long delay. Hence delay condonation petition is dismissed, and consequently, appeal is also dismissed. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE K.HEMA, JUDGE prp J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO.818 OF 2002 () & C.M.P.NO.4812 OF 2002 IN M.F.A.NO.818 OF 2002 --------------------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T --------------------------------------------------------- 14th February, 2008