1995 (1) TMI 404 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues:
1. Applicability of provisions of Order XLVII, C.P.C. to review petitions filed before Forest Tribunal under Section 8B of the Private Forests Act and before the High Court under Section 8C.
2. Interpretation of grounds for review under Section 8B of the Act.
3. Scope of review powers under Section 8B and 8C of the Act.
4. Consideration of additional grounds for review beyond those specified in Section 8B.
5. Examination of factual findings and conclusions of the Tribunal in a review petition.

Analysis:

1. The case involved a dispute regarding the applicability of Order XLVII, C.P.C. to review petitions filed before the Forest Tribunal under Section 8B of the Private Forests Act and before the High Court under Section 8C. The Tribunal allowed a review petition filed by the respondents, leading to an appeal by the appellants contending that the review order was contrary to law and evidence. The Division Bench considered the applicability of Order XLVII, Rule 1, C.P.C. based on a previous decision and the need for reconsideration.

2. The Senior Counsel for the appellants argued that Section 8B of the Act specifies grounds for review, and the Tribunal can review a judgment only if these conditions are satisfied. The Counsel contended that the Tribunal erred in considering data collected after the disposal of the original application and that the findings regarding the land being part of a private forest lacked evidence. It was also argued that the appellants were not given sufficient opportunity to establish their case.

3. The Government Pleader for the respondents submitted legal points and grounds for review in the memorandum, emphasizing that the original order lacked vital data and errors apparent on the face of the record. The Government sought review based on the need for further evidence and documentary support. The Tribunal allowed the review petition, leading to the appeal.

4. The High Court analyzed the provisions of Section 8B of the Act, emphasizing that the power of review is not restricted by the specific grounds mentioned in Section 8B(1). The Court held that the Tribunal is not limited to those grounds and may consider additional reasons for review, such as discovery of vital evidence or errors in the record. The Court clarified that Order XLVII, Rule 1, C.P.C. does not apply to reviews under the Act.

5. Upon reviewing the facts of the case, the Court found that the Tribunal's factual findings were sound, including the property being part of a private forest and the appellant not meeting the criteria for exemption under the Act. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision in the review petition, dismissing the appeal. The Court concluded that the Tribunal had considered the matter thoroughly and there was no error in the review process.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal's decision in the review petition and clarifying the scope of review powers under the Private Forests Act.