Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SATHISH NINAN
Vasu Menon, S/o. Devaki Nethiyar – Appellant
Versus
MFA (Forest) No. 118 of 2011, MFA (Forest) No. 173 of 2011, Amended MFA (Forest) No. 125 of 2017, MFA (Forest) No. 136 Of 2017 – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. original petitions dismissed regarding land notifications. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments on ecological fragility of land and possession issues. (Para 4 , 7 , 9 , 10 , 13) |
| 3. court's analysis on ecological status of property. (Para 5 , 6 , 8 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. property classified as ecologically fragile. (Para 14) |
| 5. appeals dismissed; no merit found. (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT :
Sathish Ninan, J.
The Original Petitions challenging the notification under the Kerala Forests (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the EFL Act') was dismissed by the Tribunal. M.F.A.Nos.173 and 118 of 2011 are by the respective applicants in O.A.No.2 of 2007 and O.A.No.15 of 2008. M.F.A. (Forest) Nos.125 and 136 of 2017 are by third parties. They claim to be sharers in the property along with the applicants.
2. The property involved has an extent of 90 acres. It originally belonged to the Tavazhy of Devaki @ Ammukutty Nethiyar under Jenmom Assignment Deed No.2994/1940. On her death, the property vested with the members of her family, 45 in number. The property was notified under the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act (hereinafter refer
The classification of land as 'ecologically fragile' under the EFL Act is upheld when sufficient evidence supports the environmental status, and co-sharers have standing to appeal.
Property not 'forest' under EFL Act if principally planted teak; inadequate inspection requires remand.
The court clarified that a property exempted under the Vesting Act may still be classified as ecologically fragile under the EFL Act, emphasizing the need for evidence of cultivation as of the appoin....
The State cannot assert a property as ecologically fragile if its inaction contributed to the property's condition, necessitating remand for further evidence.
The EFL Act requires a nature assessment of land as of the appointed date, not merely the intent to cultivate, to determine ecological status.
The court upheld that property not principally covered by trees cannot be classified as forest under the EFL Act, rejecting the State's claim regarding ecologically fragile land.
As per definition of an ’ecologically fragile land’ vide Section 2(b), forest land should predominantly support vegetation, which again is natural vegetation.
The property in question did not meet the statutory definition of ecologically fragile land under the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003.
The court affirmed that the property in question does not qualify as 'Ecologically Fragile Land' or 'Forest' under the Kerala Forest Act, based on the evidence presented.
'Forest', which speaks of lands which are principally covered with naturally grown trees and undergrowth and includes any recognized, declared, protected or otherwise forest land.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
