K. MADHAVA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) 1. The common cation of low that arise concideration in these two revision petitions directed against the order of the land Reforms appellate Tribunal is whether at the stage of surrender the order made under Sec. 9 read with Sec. 8 of the A. P. land Refroms (Celing on Agrl. Holdings) act. 1973 could be questioned and a pint not taken before the Land Reforms Appellate Tr. bunal could noe be rasided.

( 2 ) THE Declarant had P referred L. R. R No. 208/77 on the file of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal,nizamabad. and that was desposed of by an order dated 31-5- 1977 determining the execess land liable to be surrendered by the declarant at 0. 6026 stander Holdings. Nither before the Primary Tribunal nor before the Appllate Tribunal in the said LR. A, did the declarant take the plea that some extent of land which was computed in his holding was " Pote kharab" and as such it was not "land" within the meaning of the land as held by this Court in K. Rama Reddy vs. State of A. P. , (1) 1978 (1) A. P. . l. J. 92. When he was called upon to surrender the; excess land of 06066 standard holdings as determined in LR. A 208/77 he included in his holding plea that the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document