The court has the power to set aside commission reports and call for fresh reports to arrive at the correct decision when the evidence on record discloses that the properties have not been correctly identified.

1. The appeal is filed against the order of the Forest Tribunal, Palghat in OA Nos. 889 and 1102 of 1974. The applications were allowed by the Forest Tribunal holding that the entire extent shown in the respective Original Applications are not private forest but cashew plantation coming within the exclusion under Act 26 of 1971.

2. The parties will be referred to in this judgment by their ranking before the Tribunal.

3. The applicants in OA Nos. 889 of 1974 and 896 of 1974 are brothers. The applicant in OA 1102 of 1974 is the wife of the applicant in OA 889 of 1974. The lands comprised in the Original Applications lie contiguous. The extent of the lands in the Original Applications are 10 acres, 14.40 acres and 8 acres respectively. The entire extent of the land was purchased by the mother of the applicants in OA No. 889 and 896 of 1974 on kanom rights. Their case is that after they obtained rights over the properties they planted cashew trees in almost the entire extent of the property and in small portions they have raised fugitive cultivation.

4. Respondents filed counter statement contending that the lands in dispute form part of Anangan Mala which is an extensive forest area governed by the MPPF Act, that there is natural forest growth in the properties and that no cultivation was effected in it.

5. The Forest Tribunal by common order dated 19-8-1977 held that the applicants are not entitled to exemption either under S.3(2) or S.3(3) of Act 26 of 1971 and dismissed the applications. Applicants filed MFA No. 172,173 and 174 of 1977. On 23-7-1979 this court set aside the order of the Tribunal and remanded the case for fresh disposal. There was a direction to afford opportunity to adduce fresh evidence. After remand the present Tribunal allowed the Original Applications holding that the properties in the OAs. are cashew plantations.

6. The Tribunal relied on the commission report for its finding that the properties are cashew plantations. Government Pleader submitted that the commissioner has not properly identified the property and therefore on that score alone no reliance can be placed on his report. Government Pleader also submitted that at the time when the commissioner visited the property nobody was present on the side of the respondents, and the commissioner identified the properties only with the help of its boundaries as scheduled in the Original Applications and as pointed out by the applicants. It is pointed out that the commissioner has not properly identified the properties and this has resulted in a thoroughly wrong report which has nothing to do with the real state of affairs. To substantiate the above contention Government Pleader referred to the averments in the petitions. The averments in the petitions are not sufficient to show that the properties are cashew plantations. Hence it is evident that the properties inspected by the commissioner are not the properties scheduled in the Original Applications.

7. Commissioner stated in the report that the property in OA 839 of 1974 is a cashew plantation. He stated that he saw in the property yielding cashew trees, which are 15 to 20 years of age. In OA 889 of 1974 the applicant has stated that cashew trees are planted only in a portion of the property. But the commissioner has stated that the property is a cashew plantation. In OA 896 of 1974 the commissioner stated that the property is a cashew plantation except in some rocky portion where no plantation is possible. In the OA what the applicant has stated is that a portion of the property is cashew plantation and the rest used for agricultural purposes. In the property scheduled in OA 1102 of 1974 the commissioner did not see any coconut trees though it is the specific case of the applicant that it is planted with coconut trees and cashew trees. The commissioner has not mentioned the number of cashew trees in the properties and merely stated in the report that they are plantations. This would show that he p