A sale deed of agricultural land made without obtaining permission under Section 47 of the A.P. (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950, is void.

( 1 ) ONE Maddikunta Ramaiah was the owner and pattadar of certain agricultural lands in S No. 76 at Surangal village in Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy Disthe had four sons Keshavulu, Balarajaiah, the third respondent herein, Adivaiah and gopal. Keshavulu the eldest son sold an extent of Ac. 16-10 guntas of land on 9-10-64 to one Hanumantha Rao by a registered sale deed after obtaining the necessary permission under section 47 of the A P. (Telangana Area) Tenancy and agricultural Lands Act, 1950. Subsequently that land was sold by Hanumantha Rao in favour of the petitioner by a registered sale deed on 7-8-69. The requirement of obtaining permission under section 47 was no longer in existence by then: by Act 12/69 with effect from 18-3-69 sections 47 and 48 were deleted from the statute book. The case of the petitioner is that since 7-8-69 he has been in possession of the lands in question. The third respondent made an application to the Mandal Revenue Officer the first respondent herein, requesting him to effect mutation of the lands in his favour and that request was accepted. The petitioner made two applications before the Mandal Revenue Officer on 25-11-85 and 2-12-85 to cancel that mutation. By a reasoned order dated 30 10-86 that application was rejected by the Mandal Revenue officer. The second respondent, the appellate authority, confirmed that order. The fourth respondent dismissed the revision preferred against the appellate order aggrieved by that the present writ petition was filed.

( 2 ) THE case pleaded by the third respondent is that after the death of his father, his elder brother Keshavulu who sold the land in favour of the petitioner s vendor had no right to do so since he went in illatom adoption to another family severing all his rights with his parents family. Whatever rights Keshavulu had in his family. Stood extinguished by virtue of the said illatom adoption. The third respondent and his two brother sold an extent of Ac, 14-12 guntas by a registered sale deed on 8-10-64 in favour of one pochamma, wife of Achayya and that sale was preceded by an agreement of sale dated 22-7-62. By a sale deed dated 30-11-71 the land was purchased by them from pochamma.

( 3 ) SHRI Ravichandran, learned counsel for the petitioner that (1) there was no custom of illatom adoption in the Vyshya community; and (2) the sale deed dated 8-10-64 by which the third respondent and his two brothers conveyed the property in favour of Pochamma was void since admittedly permission under section 47 was not obtained from the Tahsildar.

( 4 ) THE first contention, I am not inclined to consider for the obvious reason that in the absence of evidence it is not possible to decide whether in the Vyshya community the custom of illatom adoption is in vogue. No decision is cited before me this regard.

( 5 ) AS regards the second contention, I am of the view that it merits acceep- tence. Section 47 of the Act reads :"47 (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any decree or order of a court, no permenent alienation and no other transfer of agricutural lands shall be valid unless it has been made with the previous sanction of the Tahsildar. "a Full Bench of this court in Parvathamma v. Excise Commissioner (1) AIR A P 333. "in the case of private alienations the rule is well settled that prior sanction should be obtained before the registration of the document, that is, at the stage when the title to the property passes to the purchaser. "sections 47 and 48 are deleted by Act 12 of 1969 with effect from 18-3-69. Section 50-B was inserted for the purpose of validating certain alienations. It reads:"50-B Validation of certain alienations and other transfers of Agricultural lands :- (1) Notwithstanding anything in this Chapter, where any alienation or other transfer of agricultural land took place-- (a) on or after the 10th June, 1950 but before the date of coming into force of the A P Ceiling o