P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

1. The main question involved in this appeal is whether the property involved herein was a 'cardamom plantation' as on 10.05.1971 – the appointed day, to be excluded from being vested with the Government under Section 3 (1) of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting & Assignment) Act, 1971 (in short 'the Vesting Act 1971'), in terms of Section 2 (f) (1) (i) (B) of the said Act. The case has travelled a long way after its inception before the Tribunal, even up to the Apex Court and after remand, to be reconsidered with reference to all the documents produced and the evidence let in.

2. The sequence of events reveals that the original applicant by name, Karimbil Kunhi Koman approached the Forest Tribunal, Kozhikkode by filing O.A. No. 170 of 1976 under Section 8 of the Act for a declaration that the property described in the application was 'cardamom plantation' and hence was not liable to be vested with the Government as forest. Later, the original applicant Mr. Kunhi Koman bid farewell to this world, pursuant to which, his widow and children came to be impleaded as the additional applicants 2 to 9, being the legal heirs.

3. The original extent shown in the application filed before the Tribunal was 910.54 acres, which was stated as a cardamom plantation, with coffee planted in some area. Subsequently, an I.A. was filed seeking to amend the extent as 1048.21 acres. The Tribunal, as per order dated 08.08.1971, found that the disputed area was cultivated prior to 10.05.1971 with cardamom and hence was not a forest liable to be vested with the Government. The O.A. was accordingly allowed, but the I.A. filed for amendment of the extent of land was dismissed. Being aggrieved of the verdict passed by the Tribunal in the O.A., the State preferred an appeal as MFA No. 454 of 1979. At the same time, the appellants being aggrieved of the order passed in I.A. dismissing the petition for amendment as to the actual extent of land preferred an appeal as MFA No. 466 of 1979.

4. During the course of hearing, it was brought to the notice of this Court from the part of the appellants that, in the counter affidavit filed by the State and by the Custodian of Vested Forests, Kozhikkode before the Tribunal, it was conceded that, out of 910.54 acres claimed by the applicants, about ½ portion was seen planted with crops and about ½ portion was left out without any cultivation prior to 10.05.1971. This by itself was an admission, and that the Tribunal was justified in allowing the O.A. and that the entire extent (as sought to be amended) was to be reckoned in connection with the finding that it was not a vested forest. Reference was also made to the fact that in all the relevant documents, the disputed property was shown as “elamala”. This was vehemently opposed from the part of the State referring to the facts and figures. After hearing both the sides, this Court passed a common verdict on 22.01.1985, whereby the impugned order passed by the Tribunal was set aside and the matter was remanded for further enquiry and for taking a decision afresh, also directing the Tribunal to deal with the amendment application preferred before the Tribunal. Based on the remand, the matter was reconsidered and the I.A. was allowed correcting the extent as 1048.21' acres as against the original extent shown as 910.54 acres. The original applicant expired by that time, and the appellants came to be impleaded as the legal heirs. After considering the pleadings and evidence, the Tribunal passed a fresh order on 31.03.1989 holding that there was no evidence to show that the disputed area was a 'plantation' as on 10.05.1971 and hence it was vested forest. Thus the O.A. preferred by the appellants was dismissed, which made the appellants to approach this Court by way of this appeal, raising many a ground on the factual and legal aspects.

5. Bo