M N SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Kerala reversing that of the Tribunal constituted under the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act 1971. The Appellant had sought and obtained from the Tribunal a declaration that an extent of 2950 acres of land was 'cardamon plantation' and not a private forest which could vest in the Government under the Act. An appeal preferred to the High Court by the Government and the Custodian under S. 8-A of the Act was allowed and the declaration was confined to a small extent of twenty five acres. We have perused the relevant evidence and we are satisfied that the finding of the High Court was substantially correct. We do not consider it necessary in this appeal under Art. 136 to discuss the evidence at any great length merely to reiterate the conclusion arrived at by the High Court. Shri Venugopal, learned counsel for the Appellant placed reliance primarily on the evidence of an Advocate-Commissioner who had purported to inspect the lands in connection with some other suits to which the Government was not a party. The High Court has given cogent reasons with which we agree to conclude that those suits were collusive, aimed at creating evidence for these proceedings. The Advocate Commissioner asserted that he inspected the vast extent of 3000 acres and counted as many as 350600 cardamom plants of the age of five to eight years and of the height of 31/2 to 71/2 feet. When questioned how he determined the age of the plants, he answered that he consulted some friends. When further asked who the friends were he said that he did not remember the names of his friends except that of one Balan whose address he did not know. Balan. we may mention, is one of the most common names in Kerala. It would be like saying Mr. Smith of England. The Advocate-Commissioner's evidence is contradicted by the report of the Commissioners who were appointed by the High Court in the present proceedings. Their reports show that there was no trace of any cardamom plantation or any cultivation except in an area of 25 acres. The whole area was covered by a dense forest which was impenetrable. The inspection report of the Tribunal also shows that there were no cardamom plants except in two or three small patches of land. Shri Venugopal urged that the inspection by the Tribunal as well as the inspection by the Commissioners appointed by the High Court were long after the vesting and it was no wonder that there were no traces of the plantation. We do not think that the cardamom plantation in an extent of 3000 acres would have been wiped out with no, trace and replaced by an impenetrable dense forest in the course of the short span of five or six years. We have no doubt that the evidence of the Advocate-Commissioner was rightly rejected by the High Court. We also agree with the High Court that some of the documents on which the appellant sought to rely were brought into existence for the purposes of this case.

(2.) Shri Venugopal also urged that the High Court erred in ignoring the admission of the defendant respondents in their counter and evidence that there was cardamom plantation in two extents of sixty acres and 150 acres respectively. Shri Venugopal is partly correct in his submission. In paragraph 3(v) of the counter it was stated: