ORDER : M.N. Venkatachaliah, P.B. Sawant and N.P. Singh, JJ. - We have heard learned counsel on both sides. Special leave granted. 2. The Division Bench of the High Court by the judgment under appeal has affirmed the order dated 29-9-1986 of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal holding that the land in question was forest land. However, the High Court did not accept the reasons that commended themselves to the Tribunal in reaching that conclusion but came to the same conclusion on wholly different grounds. Indeed, the High Court did not approve the grounds on which the Tribunal reached that conclusion. 3. The question essentially was one of fact. The grievance of the appellant before us is that since the High Court took into consideration the material placed before it for the first time by the respondent State, the appellant did not have a reasonable opportunity of traversing the same. The respondent State also urged that they have fresh material to support the finding in its favour recorded by the High Court. 4. In view of the stand taken by both the parties before us in regard to the need for a fresh opportunity to both of them, it appears appropriate that both the orders, namely, that of the High Court dated 13-3-1992/17-3-1992 in WP No. 4726 of 1986, as well as the order dated 29-9-1986 of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal be set aside and Appeal No. 4 of 1985 remitted to the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal at Bombay for being heard and disposed of afresh after affording to both the parties opportunities of adducing such further documentary evidence as they may desire. 5. Having regard to the nature of the controversy, it is appropriate that the appeal should be dealt with and disposed of most expeditiously. Both parties shall file such fresh material as they may seek to rely within six weeks from today before the Tribunal. The Tribunal is directed to dispose of the matter within two months thereafter. 6. The parties are directed to appear before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal on 15-9-1992 without the need for issue and service of any further notice to them on remand. The Tribunal shall call the matter on that date and adjourn the matter to such other date or dates as it may consider appropriate for purposes of compliance with this order. 7. The parties are directed to appear before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal on 15-9-1992 without the need for issue and service of any further notice to them on remand. The Tribunal shall call the matter on that date and adjourn the matter to such other date or dates as it may consider appropriate for purposes of compliance with this order. 7. In the meanwhile, till the appeal is disposed of, the interim order made by this Court in the present special leave petition on 14-5-1992 shall continue to operate. If the appeal is not disposed of within the time-frame given, the parties are at liberty to mention for further directions on interlocutory orders. 8. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs.