SC asks HCs and forest tribunals to carefully check fraud claims

New Delhi, Aug 20 (UNI) The Supreme Court has directed the Forest Tribunals and the High Courts to scrutinise carefully the claims of title and possession put forward by claimants along with the identities of the lands to minimise the possibility of fraud being played on the courts by unscrupulous elements.

The note of caution was sounded by a bench comprising Mr Justice A R Lakshmanan and Mr Justice P K Balasubramanyan while dismissing the appeal of one Hamza Haji with costs against the Kerala High Court judgment setting aside the order of the Forest Tribunal, directing the state to hand over the possession of 20 acres of land in Agali village, Mannarghat Taluk, Kerala.

Appellant Haji owned 22.25 hectares of land in Palakkayam village in 1968 and assigned the entire land to the buyers in 1971 and 1972 and gifted 5 acres to his brother.

On May 10, 1971, the Kerala government enacted The Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act 1971. In 1979, the appellant filed an application in the Forest Tribunal, Manjeri under section 8 of the Act seeking a declaration that the applicant's scheduled property was not a private forest liable to be vested in the government. He scheduled 8.10 hectares equivalent to 20 acres in SY no 2157 in village Angali. Haji claimed exemption under section 3(2) of the Act and in alternative claimed that even if the land was private forest, the same was held by him as owner under his personal cultivation and with intent to cultivate and that was within the limits applicable to him under the Kerala Land Reforms Act and hence the same may be declared to be exempt from vesting under section 3(3) of the Act.

The appellant deliberately and intentionally concealed from the court the fact that he had already disposed of his entire property and was not the owner of the land in question and therefore, played fraud on the Tribunal and obtained the order for getting possession of 20 acres of land after taking the court for a ride.

The Tribunal upheld the claim of Haji on the basis of purchase deed produced by him before the court. The High Court dismissed the appeal of the state government on March 8, 1983.

Due to widespread complaints and emerging public opinion, the government realised that quite a number of applications before the Forest Tribunals for exemption or exclusion by unscrupulous elements managed to seek permission in connivance with the Forest Authorities and with counsel engaged by the state before the tribunals and before the High Court. The Act was amended on November 19, 1983 conferring powers on the custodian of the vested land and on the state government to file review and appeals against tribunal orders in certain cases.

Dismissing the appeal, the top court noted, ''We hope that this judgment will act as an eye opener to the Forest Tribunals and the High Court exercising appellate jurisdiction in dealing with claims, (obviously now they are belated claims) for exemption or exclusion under section 8 of the Act. It directs the Forest Tribunals and the appellate court to carefully scrutinise the case of title and possession put forward by claimants as also the identities of the land sought to be claimed while entertaining applications under section 8 of the Act. In any event, as we have indicated this is a fit case where we should clearly decline to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India to come to the aid of the appellant to secure to him the fruits of the fraud praticed by him on the Forest Tribunal and the High Court.'' UNI AKS SC PR HT1235