Point of Law: It is well settled that local inspection is not intended to substitute the enquiry envisaged in law.

JUDGMENT :

K.Vinod Chandran, J.

The applicant, a Private Limited Company, is the appellant herein who is aggrieved with the rejection of an application filed under S.8 of the Kerala Private Forest (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1979 (for brevity 'the Vesting Act'). The applicant claimed that the scheduled properties having an extent of 164.540 hectares was purchased by the applicant from one M.A Jan & children. The predecessors-in-interest acquired right over a larger extent measuring 1004.24 acres of land purchased from one Madhura Plantations. The devolution of the said land to M.A Jan, his wife & children is proved by Exts.A1 to A3. Exts.A4 to A6 are the sale deeds executed by M.A Jan & others to the applicant. Previously, the State had notified an extent of 523 acres out of the total extent of lands existing in Sy.Nos.88/A1, 88/2 88/1E1, 88/1,2,88/1C1, 88/1C2 and 88/D of Thavinjal Amsam. M.A Jan filed O.A No.364/1976 before the Forest Tribunal under S.8 of the Vesting Act. The Tribunal by order dt 20.06.1978 allowed the OA in part finding certain extents to be exempted as plantation of either cardamom or coffee and a further extent around the perennial stream, from which water was used for irrigating the plantation. The State & the applicant filed appeals in which the order of the Tribunal was affirmed. In the present proceedings which arises from a notification of the year 2001, the major contention of the applicant is that in the earlier proceedings the forest department had admitted that the land vested under the Vesting Act was that notified and the balance properties were exempted since they were developed areas planted with cardamom and coffee, prior to the appointed day under the Vesting Act. The respondents also relied on the report of local inspection conducted by the Forest Tribunal which categorically found the balance properties to be a plantation.

2. The DFO North Wayanad contested the applicant's title interest and possession over the properties scheduled. It was asserted that the title deeds does not pertain to the scheduled properties and they were neither genuine nor legally valid. It was pointed out that an extent of 222.43 hectares in Sy.Nos.88/1B1,1A5 and 2/1 had been notified as vested by an earlier notification dt 13.07.1978. In OA 364/76 filed by M.A Jan only 27 acres was allowed to be restored which falls in Sy. No 88/1A and 88/2. In the year 2001 the Government had notified 164.540 hectares left out to be notified earlier. The said area also lies contiguous to forest land and in appearance it lies thickly wooded with forest species vegetation. The assertion of cardamom and coffee plantation was stoutly refuted, the nature of the land was stated to be semi evergreen with lush undergrowth supporting saplings of forest species. The department also filed additional statement specifically pointing out that the properties notified as vested is comprised in Sy.Nos.88/1A, 2,1E, E2, 1C1, 1C2 of Thavinjal Village in Mananthavadi Taluk, Wayand District. As per the erratum notification issued by the Custodian of vested forest dt.12.5.2008 the earlier extent was modified and the same was stated to be only 160.1330 hectares as against the earlier notified 164.400 hectares.

3. Before the Tribunal PW1, examined on the side of the applicant, marked Exts.A1 to A20 and RW1 examined on the side of respondents, marked Exts.B1 to B6 series. The Tribunal raised three issues; as to whether the application scheduled property is a vested forest, whether it is liable to be exempted under s.3(2) and (3) of the Vesting Act and whether the applicant is entitled to the declaration prayed for. The Tribunal first noticed decisions of a Full Bench and Division Bench of this Court in State of Kerala v. Chandraleka [1995 (2) KLT 152 (FB)] and State of Kerala v. Kunhiraman [1990 (1) KLT 382] to hold that the burden to prove that the scheduled property is not a vested forest rests squarely on the shoulders of the applicant who prefers the c