Important Points
1. In order to claim exemption from Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, the claimant has establish by appropriate evidence that the land in respect of which he seeks an exemption was being used on the appointed day i.e., 10th May, 1971 under the said Act.
2. The area “required for the purpose of growing firewood trees for fuel in the factories and smoke-houses (of rubber plantations) as well as for supply to the employees of the estate for their domestic use should be excluded from the definition of the term private forest .” In Section 2 of Kerala Private Forests Act.
3. Where the large part of a parcal of land is used for plantation of the specified crops leaving only a small part within not so cultivated, it is reasonable to say that the parcel of land as a whole is used principally for the cultivation of the specified crops u/s 2 of Kerala Private Forests Act.

Headnote:Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971-Section 2-Private Forest-Meaning of -Exclusion of lands used principally for cultivation of tea, coffee etc. and land used for any ancillary propose-Words “are used” necessarily refers to such use as on the appointed date, namely 10th May, 1971-Claimant for exemption must establish lands were being used for cultivation of tea, coffee etc. or for ancillary propose as on 10th May, 1971-Land used for supplying firewood for smoke- house and its workers excludible from definition of private forest.
       Held : "Private forest" in the Act means in relation to the erstwhile Malabar District of the State of Madras, land to which the Madras Preservation of Private Forests Act applied immediately before 10th May, 1971, being the appointed day under the said Act, but excluding, inter alia, “lands which are used principally for the cultivation of tea, coffee, cocoa, rubber, cardamom or cinnamon and lands for any purpose ancillary to the cultivation of such crops or to the preparation for the same to the market.” Such lands so used are, therefore, not private forests within the meaning of the said Act. Now what this means is that lands in the Malabar District aforementioned which are used (a) principally for the cultivation of tea, coffee, cocoa, rubber, cardamom or cinnamon, (b) for any purpose ancillary to the cultivation of such crops, and (c) for the preparation of such crops for the market are not private forests under the said Act. The use of the words “are used” in this context necessarily refers to such use as on the appointed date under the said Act, namely, 10th May, 1971. It is not possible to give any other meaning to the words “are used”. They must relate to use on that particular day for it is on that day that land is or is not a private forest within the meaning of the said Act. (Para 8)
       What, therefore, is necessary for a claimant for exemption to establish in regard to land within the aforementioned Malabar District is that on 10th May, 1971, its lands were being used principally for the cultivation of tea, coffee, cocoa, rubber, cardamom or cinnamon or that they were being used on that day for any purpose ancillary to the cultivation of such crops or that they were being used on that day for the preparation of such crops for the market. (Para 9)
       The area “required for the purpose of growing firewood trees for fuel in the factories and smoke-houses (of rubber plantations) as well as for supply to the employees of the estate for their domestic use should be excluded from the definition of the term private forest .” (Para 10)
       (ii) Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971-Section 2-Private forest-Wooded areas in enclaves surrounded by plantation of prescribed crops cannot be considered as Private forest-Such uncultivated area can be considered as lands principally used for cultivation.
       Held : Having regard particularly to the words in the definition, “lands which are used principally for the cultivation of .........”, where the large part of a parcel of land is used for plantation of the specified crops leaving only a small part within not so cultivated, it is reasonable to say that the parcel of land as a whole is used principally for the cultivation of the specified crops. (Para 16)

Judgment

Bharucha, J.-Civil Appeal No. 4253/ 1984 and Civil Appeal No. 4423/1984 :

The Pullangode Rubber & Produce Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “the company”) is the appellant in Civil Appeal No. 4423 of 1984. It owned 3687.48 acres of land, on 2148.28 acres of which rubber trees were planted. The said fell within the Malabar District of the State of Madras prior to the coming into force of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956; thereafter it fell within the State of Kerala. The said land was governed by the Madras Preservation of Private Forest Act, 1949, immediately before the appointed day, 10th May, 1971, under the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”).

2. The said Act was enacted to provide for the vesting of private forests in the State Government and the assignment thereof to agriculturists and agricultural labourers for cultivation. Section 2 of the said Act defined ‘private forest’ to mean, in relation to the Malabar District aforementioned, land to which the Madras Preservation of Private Forests Act, 1949, applied immediately before the appointed day under the said Act, excluding, inter alia, “lands which are used principally for the cultivation of tea, coffee, cocoa, rubber, cardamom or cinnamon and lands used for any purposes ancillary to the cultvation of such crops or for the preparation of the same for the market.”

3. The company contended, among other things, that an area of 594,78 acres out of the said land was not a private forest within the meaning thereof quoted above being “uncultivated jungle area reserved for fuel purpose for manufacture of rubber, for use of labourers employed in the estate numbering about 1000, and for green manure/mulching ancillary to the plantation and rocky area”. It was stated in the company’s claim statement thus :

“This is chunk of land overgrown with wild growth whose retension with the applicant is absolutely necessary for reasons more than one. It is the only source of firewood necessary for the use as fuel for the manufacture of rubber and the vast plantations owned by the applicant depend for their economic exploitation on the firewood made available by the bit of jungle area. The firewood required by the large contingent of labourers and members of the staff employed in the estate is also supplied by this area. It also constituted the sole source of green manure so vitally required by the rubber plantations ground, which would be in their absence devoid of manure. Besides they are also the grazing ground for the cattle of the petitioner and its employees.”

4. The Forest Tribunal constituted under the said Act which adjudicated the Company’s claim noted :

“The date of commencement of the Act is 10.5.1971. So the state of affairs as on that date has to be considered. The requirement of firewood may increase as years go by. The point to be considered is whether this vast extent of jungle area was being used for taking firewood and not whether this property is not (sic) required by the petitioner to meet all its needs regarding firewood.”

The Tribunal discussed the evidence of the witness on behalf of the company and the stock books that it had produced. It noted that the stock books, especially those prior to 1971, did not show that firewood was being regularly supplied to the workers and staff. According to the witness, firewood was necessary for making charcoal for sharpening the tools for tapping and for other maintenance work in the company’s estate. He had also stated that firewood was being supplied to the canteen and the hospitals in the estate. The stock registers of the period prior to 10th May 1971, the Tribunal found, did not show that considerable quantities of firewood were being used for these purposes at that time. Further, in the Tribunal’s view, the requirements of firewood for the domestic use of workers and staff for converting into charcoal and for suppling to the hospital and cantee

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1999 Supreme(SC) 768

Cases Referred (1)