LAWS(KER)-1986-12-6

MANI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On December 16, 1986
MANI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Forest Tribunal, Manjeri has dismissed an application filed by the appellant under S.8 of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act') for a declaration that the petition schedule property is not a private forest. Hence the appellant has come up with this appeal.

(2.) In the application the appellant claims right over an area of 7 acres in Agali Village (Mannarghat Taluk). The application further states that the said area forms part of 50 acres of land which his brother, Chacko and nine others obtained as per an assignment of a leasehold right in the year 1956, the appellant got 12 1/2 acres of land by way of an oral sale in 1960 from his brother Chacko, which is a portion of the aforesaid 50 acres of land and later the appellant had attorned to the lessor in 1962. According to him, the land sold to him had been cultivated by him with rubber, jack trees, plantain etc., from 1962 onwards, and he has obtained a certificate of purchase from the Land Tribunal, Agali in respect of the said land. But when the forest officials prevented him from enjoying the petition schedule property he filed the application for a declaration that the said land is not a forest area. In the counter statement filed by the Divisional Forest Officer, on behalf of the State of Kerala, it is contended that the petition schedule property is a portion of the vested forest coming within the definition of private forest under the erstwhile Madras Preservation of Private Forests Act, 1949 (for short 'the MPPF Act'). He further says that no sort of cultivation was raised in the area at any time prior to 10th May 1971 which is the appointed day as per S.3(1) of the Act.

(3.) The Forest Tribunal has found that the petition schedule property was governed by the provisions of the erstwhile MPPF Act immediately prior to 10th May, 1971. He further found that the appellant has failed to prove his ownership over the land and that the said property had not been cultivated at any time prior to 10th May 1971.