The absence of statutory provisions prohibits government claims over trees planted post-property assignment.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 20^th day of January, 2026 Petitioner purchased 26 ares and 76 sq.mtr of property on

03.01.2020 as per Document No.31 of 2020. The property is covered by Ext.P1 patta which is issued on 28.09.1972. In Ext.P1 no teak wood is reserved in the pattayam on the date of assignment. Later the previous owner planted certain teak wood in the property which was cut and removed by the petitioner for the purpose of construction of a house. Thereupon the 3^rd respondent came to the property and initiated proceedings against the petitioner. Thereafter the Village Officer took the wooden logs into his custody and is still remaining there. Thereafter the 2^nd respondent issued Ext.P3 order directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.4,51,132/- and Rs.500/- towards fine towards the value of trees cut and removed by the petitioner. It is further directed that if the amount is not paid revenue recovery proceedings would be initiated. Thereupon petitioner paid the amount demanded as evident from Ext.P3 receipt. Petitioner submits that the teak wood trees were planted by the previous owner and that the same is not reserved in the patta issued as per Ext.P1, and therefore no claim can be made by the respondents for the said trees. Petitioner submits that the issue is covered in their favour by the judgment of this Court in State of Kerala v. Thankachan [ 2025 (6) KLT 251 ], wherein it is held that in the absence of any statutory provision to vest the trees which grew subsequent to the assignment, the conditions of patta that the assignee has to take care of all trees standing on the land itself will not confer any right or interest on the Government.

2. I have heard the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the Forest Department.

3. Admittedly, teak trees are not seen reserved in Ext.P1, and therefore going by the dictum laid down by this Court in Thankachan’s case cited supra, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to succeed. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the respondent to release the wooden logs taken into custody by the 3^rd and 4^th respondent to the petitioner immediately, and also to return back the amount received from the petitioner as per Ext.P3 receipt. The same shall be done within an outer limit of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

With the above said direction the writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-