High Court Kerala High Court

Somadas vs The Custodian Of Vested Forest & on 10 August, 2009

Kerala High Court
Somadas vs The Custodian Of Vested Forest & on 10 August, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 22065 of 2009(C)


1. SOMADAS, S/O.PADMANABHAN, PONNUVILA
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE CUSTODIAN OF VESTED FOREST &
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER, PALAKKAD.

3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.N.PURUSHOTHAMA KAIMAL

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :10/08/2009

 O R D E R
                         V.GIRI, J
                       -------------------
                    W.P.(C).22065/2009
                       --------------------
          Dated this the 10th day of August, 2009

                       JUDGMENT

Petitioner claims absolute title and possession over

10.13 Acres of land in Sy.No.1/7A, 1.48 Acres in Sy.No.2/1A

and .05 Acres in Sy.No.2/1B of Thenur amsom in Palakkad

District under Ext.P1 sale deed. The predecessor-in-interest

of the petitioner had approached the Forest Tribunal for

exemption of the property and the application was allowed

under Section 3(2) of the Kerala Private Forest Vesting and

Assignment Act, as per Ext.P2. An appeal preferred by the

Government was also dismissed under Ext.P3 and an

attempt at review by the Government was also rejected as

per Ext.P4.

2. Petitioner has been cultivating rubber in that property

after obtaining licence from the Rubber Board. He is

aggrieved by the attempts made by respondents 1 and 2 to

interfere with the petitioner’s actual possession of the

property which he claims absolutely belongs to him.

W.P.(C).22065/09
2

3. I am of the view that the petitioner has an efficacious

remedy before the Civil Court, if any person including

respondents 1 and 2 try to interfere with the possession of

title holder of the property. He is at liberty to avail such

remedy.

Subject to the above, writ petition is disposed of.

V.GIRI,
Judge

mrcs