SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(SC) 67

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Kuldip Singh : N.M.Kasliwal
State Of Kerala
Versus
Kanan Devan Hills Produce Company Limited
Case No. : 1277 of 1979
Date of Decision : 2/7/91
Advocates Appeared: Balakrishnan S. : Francis V.J. : Ganesh S. : Iyer G.Vishwanatha : Joseph Joy : Krishnan Baby : Nambiar K.R. : Nariman F.S. : Parasaran K. : Pillai P.K. : Sukumaran S. : Varma A.K. : Verma A.K.

Headnote:

Kerala Forest Act, 1961 - Section,85 - Forest Department claim - Company - Poona Raja by deed dated hereinafter called First Concession conveyed concession area with all hills and forests therein to one Munro for cash consideration deferred perpetual annual payment onwards - Thereafter on July second document was executed between same parties hereinafter called Second Concession - Terms first concession were reiterated enduring to Munro his heirs successors and assigns absolute right forever to make all kinds of cultivations and improvements on Concession Area – Held, Para saran contended that State government interpreted clause to mean that no seignior age was due from company on trees other than royal trees specified in said clause - He argued that in face of government decision in above letter government could not demand from respondent company in respect of non royal trees removed from within limits of Concession Area - Court do not agree with contention of counsel - letter reproduced above refers to letter written by General Manager of company to government - Letter states as question arose through Forest Department claiming seignior age on certain species of timber used by this company within concession area for building purposes and which have been reserved Forest Regulation - Letter also states as think it advisable that whole question of timber rights in concession should be considered and settled if possible - IT is no doubt correct that while focusing controversy in respect of timber used by company within Concession Area General Manager dealt with larger question of timber rights in Concession Area but reading two letters together only conclusion which could be reached is that letter was with respect to use of timber by company within Concession Area - Letter cannot be read to mean that no was livable on timber removed by respondent company outside Concession Area - In any case wording of clause is clear and unambiguous – Order accordingly

Judgment

KULDIP SINGH, J.

(1) THE dispute before us is regarding the ownership rights over the timber clear-felled from about 150 acres of jungle area in Kallar Valley and the right to transport the timber so felled from the said area.

(2) THE Kallar Valley area forms part of the tract of land originally known as Kannan Devan Anchanatu Mala in the erstwhile Travancore territory of Kerala State. This area is generally called the Kanan Devan Hills concession (hereinafter called the Concession Area). The Poonjar Raja, held freehold proprietary rights in the Concession Area. Originally the Raja was exercising sovereign rights but later on he came under the suzerainty of Travancore State.

(3) THE Poonjar Raja, by a deed dated July 11, 1877 (hereinafter called First Concession), conveyed the concession area with all the hills and forests therein to one J.D. Munro for cash consideration of Rs. 5,000.00 and a deferred perpetual annual payment of Rs. 3,000.00 from 1884 onwards. Thereafter on July 26, 1879 a second document was executed between the same parties (hereinafter called Second Concession). The terms of the first concession were reiterated enuring to Munro, his heirs, successors and assigns absolute right forever to make all kinds of cultivations and improvements on the Concession Area.

(4) THE grant of rights to Munro by the First Concession was ratified by the Travancore government by a deed of ratification dated November 28, 1878. Munro assigned the Concession Area to the North Travancore Land Planting and Agricultural Society Limited by a deed dated December 8, 1879. Thereafter an agreement was executed between the Travancore Government and the Society on August 2, 1886.

(5) BY virtue of the agreement dated September 18, 1889 between the Poonjar Raja and the Travancore government and the proclamation of the Maharaja of Travancore dated August 24, 1899 the territory comprising the Kannan Devan Hills including the Concession Area was declared part of the Travancore State. There were various transfers in respect of the Concession Area but finally by a deed dated 16/07/1900, the Concession Area came to be vested in the Kanan Devan Hills Produce Company Limited (hereinafter called the company).

(6) IN and around May 1963 the company clear-felled about 150 acres in the Concession Area for cultivation. The company applied to the State government for grant of free passes to transport the timber from the Concession Area. The State government by an order dated 25/11/1966 informed the company that it could not take away timber outside the limits of the Concession Area except in accordance with the rules of the forest department and on payment of levy in the shape of kuttikanam. According to the government in terms of the deeds of conveyance/ratification the company was liable to pay kuttikanam in respect of the timber taken out of the Concession Area.

(7) THE company filed a suit in the year 1968 in the court of Subordinate Judge, Kottayam against the State of Kerala and its officers. In the suit, the company prayed for tiie following reliefs:

(A) A declaration that the plaintiff-company has full and unqualified ownership and title over, and right of removal of the said timber from the Concession Area;

(B) Declaration that the State has no right to claim seigniorage, kuttikanam or any other payment in respect of the said timber;

(C) A mandatory injunction directing the defendants to grant the necessary free passes for the free transit of the timber outside the Concession Area;

(D) Prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from taking any steps under the order dated 25/11/1966.

(8) THE State government resisted the suit and controverted the interpretation placed by the company on the deeds of conveyance/ratification. According to the State the company was only a lessee of the Concession Area and in terms of the deeds of conveyance/ratification t







































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top