IMPORTANT POINTS:
" The jurisdiction and power of the Forest Tribunal is confined to the provisions, under clause (a) to (c) of Section 10 of EFL Act.
" A contract for sale of the immovable property is a contract that a sale of such property shall take place on terms settled between the parties and it does not, of itself, create any interest in or charge on such property.

K. HARILAL, J.

1. The questions, that arise for consideration in this O.P.(C) are: (1) Has the buyer, who entered into an agreement for sale with the seller, the right to get impleaded in an application filed by the seller, against the Government, under Section 10 of the Kerala Forests (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Land) Act 2003 (herein after referred to as 'the EFL Act') seeking a decree declaring that the application schedule property is not an ecologically fragile land and to set aside the order passed against the seller. (2) Does an agreement for sale of an immovable property by itself create a charge in favour of the buyer at the inception of the agreement itself, on the seller's interest in the property, to the extent of advance purchase money paid by the buyer under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act.

2. The petitioner herein is the applicant in O.A No.5/2009, filed before the Court of the Tribunal for EFL Cases, Kozhikode. The aforesaid O.A was filed, seeking a decree declaring that the application schedule property is not an ecologically fragile land and to set aside the order dated 18.06.2009 passed by the 2nd respondent herein, whereby, 242 acres of land belonging to the petitioner was declared as 'Ecological Fragile Land'. While the aforesaid O.A was pending consideration before the Tribunal, the 3rd respondent herein filed a petition, under Order I Rule 10 r/w. Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to get himself impleaded in the said O.A as supplemental 2nd applicant or supplemental 3rd respondent.

3. The petitioner herein filed objection contending that the 3rd respondent has no right to get himself impleaded in the said O.A as he has no kind of right or interest in the said property. But the petitioner admitted that there was an agreement for sale, dated 14.09.2004 and the term of agreement expired on 30.09.2005. Since the 3rd respondent was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract, the sale deed was not executed and the 3rd respondent has not resorted to file a civil suit for specific performance, so far. That apart, though the petitioner had executed a power-of-attorney in favour of the 3rd respondent, the said power-of-attorney also has expired on 30.09.2005 and it is no longer in force. The 3rd respondent cannot claim any kind of right over the property, either under the agreement for sale or under the power-of-attorney, which stands expired.

4. After considering the rival pleas, the Tribunal allowed the said application and the 3rd respondent was impleaded as the supplemental 3rd respondent in the above O.A. The legality and propriety of the findings, whereby the Tribunal allowed the 3rd respondent to get himself impleaded in the proceedings in the O.A, filed by the petitioner, are assailed in this O.P.C.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Special Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the respondent.

6. Let us consider both questions together, as they are intricately connected together. Going by the impugned order, it could be seen that the 3rd respondent has filed an application to get himself impleaded in the O.A, either as second applicant or as 3rd respondent, on the basis of an agreement for sale, dated 14.09.2004, executed by the petitioner in favour of the 3rd respondent. Therefore, the question in controversy involved in this OP(C) revolves around the scope and extent of right in favour of the 3rd respondent/buyer and emerges from the agreement for sale, dated 14.09.2004. There arises the general question, what is the extent of right conferred to the buyer, under an agreement for sale of an immovable property. According to Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (herein after referred to as 'the TP Act'), a contract for sale of the immovable property is a contract that a sale of such property shall take place on terms settled between the parties and it does not, of itself, create any inte