The burden of proof is upon the declarant to prove that alienations made between 24-1-1971 and the notified date were not made with a view to avoid or defeat the provisions of the Act.

ALLADI KUPPUSWAMI, J.

( 1 ) THESE two revision petitions arise out of proceedings under the andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (referred to in this judgment as the Act ). As a common question of law arises in these two revision petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. It is admitted by the learned counsel on both sides that the facts in the two cases are almost identical and the decision in one will govern the other. It is therefore sufficient if we deal with C. R. P. No. 1313/76.

( 2 ) THE respondent filed a declaration under section 8 (1) of the Act- in annexure III to the declaration, he gave particulars of Ac. 5-09 cents of wet land and Ac. 50-021 cents of dry land which he had sold on different occasions between 24-1-1971 and 27-3-1972. Under Section 7 of the Act, it is provided as follows:" (I) Where on or after the 24th January, 1971 but before the notified date, any person has transferred whether by way of sale, gift, usufructuary mortgage, exchange, settlement, surrender, or in any other manner whatsoever, any land held by him or created a trust of any land held by him, then the burden of proving that such transfer or creation of trust has not been effected in anticipation of, and with a view to avoiding or defeating the objects of any law relating to a reduction in the ceiling on agricultural holdings, shall be on such person, and where he has not so proved, such transfer or creation of trust, shall be disregarded for the purpose of the computation of the ceiling area of such person. "under sub-section (7) (a)-"if any question arises-Whether any transfer or creation of a trust effected on or after the 24th January, 1971, had been effected in anticipation of and with a view to avoiding or defeating the objects of, any law relating to a reduction in the ceiling on agricultural holdings, such question shall be determined by the tribunal, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the affected parties, and its decision thereon shall, subject to an apreal and a revision under this Act, be final. "in the light of this Section, the Land Reforms Tribunal, Nellore considered whether the extent of land which had been alienated between 24-1-71 and 27-3-72 should be included in the holding of (he dec arant for the purpose of ascertaining the land which he is entitled to retain under the Act and the excess which he has to surrender. The declarant contended that these alienations were not made with a view to avoid or defeat the law relating to ceiling on agricultural holding but were effected by him in the ordinary course. He submitted that he and his brother (Petitioner in CRP. 1366/76) wanted to start a distillery and had applied for grant of a licence. They required considerable funds for that purpose. They therefore started selling the lands and effected the various sales over an interval of nearly one and half years i. e. , between October 1971 and March, 1972. In this connection, in view of certain objections raised by a third party, one Vemareddi Seshadrireddi, a special enquiry was conducted by the Tribunal in addition to the routine report obtained from the Tahsildar. The Karnam was also examined. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that all the sales were genuine transactions and the lands comprised therein cannot be taken into account in computing the holding of the declarant and fixing the ceiling.

( 3 ) THE State of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Special Tahsildar, Authorised officer, Land Reforms, Nellore preferred an appeal to the land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Nellore. The Chairman of the Appellate tribunal observed that there was no reason to interfere with the order of the lower Tribunal and the conclusions were correct. After considering the evidence in the case, the Chairman held that the declarant has discharged the burden cast on him under section 7 (1) of the Act of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document