Judgment

R. M. SAHAI, J.:- The short and the only question of law that survives for consideration in these appeals directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Karnataka is whether rubber sheets of various grades supplied by the State of Karnataka or the Karnataka Forest Plantation Corporation to the private limited companies were Forest Produce within the meaning of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as, the Act) and hence liable to payment of forest development tax under S. 98A thereof.

Even though validity of sub-sec. (1) of S. 101A, which enabled the State Government to grant or supply forest produce to any person on payment of seigniorage value as may be fixed by the Chief Conservator of Forest was challenged, it does not appear to have been pressed in the High Court either before the learned single Judge or the Division Bench nor was it pressed even, in this Court to support the order of the High Court. The dispute, thus, centres round the question whether rubber sheets could be regarded as forest produce. It may further not be out of place to mention that the definition of Forest Produce in the Act was amended in 1989 and rubber latex was a