NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH, J.

1. The State being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 8.12.2015 passed in O.P. No.12870 of 2002, have filed this intra court appeal. The contesting respondent, upon notice, have appeared.

2. We have heard Sri. Ranjith Thampan, the learned Additional Advocate General and Sri. Jayaprakash Sen, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the party respondent at length and with their consent, disposing of this appeal at this stage itself.

3. Basic facts are not in dispute, though the legal effect thereof are contested. The matter arises out of a proceedings under the Kerala Escheats and Forfeitures Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). Section 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Act 4 of 1964 reads as follows:

3. Escheats:- Where a person dies intestate and without leaving legal heirs, all his property shall be escheat and shall belong to the Government."

4. Preliminary enquiry.-Whenever the Collector receives information from any source that any person in possession of any movable or immovable property lying within his jurisdiction has died intestate and without legal heirs, he shall cause an inquiry to be made as to whether the deceased has died intestate and whether he has left any legal heirs.

5. Publication in the Gazette.-If, as a result of the inquiry under section 4, the Collector is satisfied that the deceased has died intestate and without legal heirs and that it is a prima facie case of escheat, he shall publish in the Gazette a notice calling upon all persons who may have any claim to the property of the deceased to appear before him and prefer their claims within six months from the date of publication of the notice.

6. Investigation and decision.-If any claim is preferred within the period fixed under section 5, the Collector shall investigate the claim and take in all evidence produced by the claimant. He shall decide the case after such inquiry as he deems fit to make, and issue notice of the decision to the parties concerned. The decision of the collector shall be final, subject to the provisions of sections 7 and 11.

4. It appears that there was a property measuring about 37 cents lying in the town of Trivandrum. On or about 3.10.1994, one Mr. Francis purporting to be a social worker, made an application to the District Collector, Trivandrum alleging that the owner of the said property had died without leaving legal heirs and as such, the Government should exercise the powers of escheat and take over the property.

5. Pursuant to the application so filed, the District Collector directed the Tahsildar to conduct an enquiry under Section 4 of the Act and submit a report. The Tahsildar made enquiries and submitted Ext.P13 report dated 19.1.1995 wherein the Tahsildar had clearly stated that the said property belonged to Ramaji, agent of M/s. Mulji Jetha & Company, Bombay. The Tahsildar further mentioned that the properties of M/s. Mulji Jetha & Company were handed over to a Trust by name Shree Navanagar Sadavarat Trust, whose trustees name were also given. In that it was also mentioned that one of the trustee was Smt. Velabhai Chaturbhuj, widow of Chaturbhuj Gordhandas. He also informed the District Collector that property tax, water charges and electricity charges are paid regularly by the Trust.

6. Notwithstanding the aforesaid report, on 16.8.1997, the District Collector, referring to the report of the Tahsildar as aforesaid held that, on enquiry it was revealed that the properties and the buildings therein was owned by M/s. Mulji Jetha & Company doing business at Mattancherry (Kochi) and Bombay and that the owners of the properties died intestate without legal heirs and that it is a prima facie case of escheat. This notification was also published in the official gazette of Kerala, Collector's Office and local newspapers.

7. It appears that the matter was contested by the original petitioner. But the District Collector by his order dated 2.9.1998 rejected all the objections and ordered