Can the Forest Tribunal Make a Finding on Title?

Whether the finding on title (if any) will be res judicata?

Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam.

Law on the point as to jurisdiction, and substantive adjudication.

To answer the question (Can the Forest Tribunal make a finding on title) the  

following established principles of law stand germane.

• 1. A finding of a quasi-judicial Tribunal  [Joseph v. State of Kerala: 1987(1) KLT 651;  Satish Babu v. State of Kerala: 2000(3) KLT 55; Govindan Gopalan v. Raman Gopalan: 1978 KLT 315 (FB) ] will not be res judicata if –
  • observation or finding touching upon title is incidental and collateral to the principal issue falling within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction;
  • the finding is limited to the special jurisdiction of the Tribunal and it is not  a direct and substantive adjudication upon title. (Sajjadanishing Sayed v. Musa: (2000)3 SC 350)
• 2. Civil Court jurisdiction will be barred (Dhulabhai v. State of MP, AIR 1969 SC 78) only if –
  • the Statute gives a finality to the orders of the special tribunals,  
  • there is adequate remedy by the special tribunal to do what the Civil Courts would normally do in a suit,  
  • there is an express bar of the jurisdiction of the Court, 
  • the remedies normally associated with actions in Civil Courts are prescribed by the particular Statute under which the Tribunal is constituted.

Kerala Private Forest Act, 1971

The Forest Tribunal is constituted under the Kerala Private Forest (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971.

Section 3 of the Act declares – Private Forests, vest in Government, automatically.

Section 3 reads as under:-

• “3. Private forests to vest in Government.- (I) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, or in any contract or other document, but subject to the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3), with effect on and from the appointed day, the ownership and possession of all private forests in the state of Kerala shall by virtue of this Act, stand transferred to and vested in the Government free from all encumbrances, and the right, title and interest of the owner or any other person in any private forest shall stand extinguished.
• (2) Nothing contained in sub-sections (1) shall apply in respect of so much extent of land comprised in private forests held by an owner under his personal cultivation as is within the ceiling limit applicable to him under the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (1 of 1964) or any building or structure standing thereon or appurtenant thereto. Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub-section, “cultivation” includes cultivation of trees or plants of any species.
• (3) Nothing contained in sub-section (1) shall apply in respect of so much extent of private forests held by an owner under a valid registered document of title executed before the appointed day and intended for cultivation by him, which together with other lands held by him to which Chapter III of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, is applicable, does not exceed the extent of the ceiling are applicable to him under Section 82 of the said Act.
•  (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, private forests shall, for the purposes of sub-section (2) or sub-section (3), be deemed to be lands to which Chapter III of the said Act is applicable and for the purposes of calculating the ceiling limit applicable to an owner, private forests shall be deemed to be “other dry lands” specified in Schedule II to the said Act.” 

Section 8

Section 8 states that the disputes as to whether a land is a private forest or not or has not (automatically) vested in Government or not is determined by the Tribunal.  From the wording of Section 8 it is noteworthy – what is determined is not title; but whether it is a private forest or not. 

It is also important to note – title enquiry is not contemplated under Section 8; for,  ‘all private forests’  “stand transferred to and vested in the government”, under section 8.  Therefore, the finding as to the title/ownership of the land is a surplusage; in any case, such a finding would stand ‘incidental or collateral’. 

Section 8 reads as under:

• “8. Settlement of disputes.- (1) where any dispute arises as to whether- (a) any land is a private forest or not; or (b) any private forest or portion thereof has vested in the Government or not, the person who claims that the land is not a private forest or that the private forest has not vested in the Government, 3[may, within such period as may be prescribed, apply to the Tribunal] for decision of the dispute.
• (2) Any application under sub-section (1) shall be in such from as may be prescribed.
• (3) If the Tribunal decides that any land is not a private forest or that a private forest or portion there of has not vested in the Government and-
• (a) no appeal has been preferred against the decision of the Tribunal within the period specified there for; or
• (b) such appeal having been preferred has been dismissed by the High Court, the custodian shall, as soon as may be after the expiry of the period referred to in clause (a) or, as the case may be, after the date of the order of the High Court dismissing the appeal, restore possession of such land or private forest or portion, as the case may be, to the person in possession thereof immediately before the appointed day].”