P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, C. J.

( 1 ) THESE five second appeals, the first appeal and the Civil revision petition have been referred to a Bench by our learned brothers Venkatesam, J. , Krishna Rao, J. , and Obul Reddy, J. , by their respective orders for resolving the conflict between the two decisions of Gopal Rao Ekbote J. , in Ramulu v. Narashimhulu, (1963) 1 Andh WR 165 and Raghvachari v. Ramkrishan Reddy (1965) 2 Andh WR 61, on the one hand and two decisions of N. D. Krishna Rao J. , (as he then was) in Ramulu v. Anantharamulu, 1964 (2) Andh WR 161= (AIR 1966 Andh Pra 70) and C. B. Taraporwals v. Kazim Ali Pasha, 1966 (2) Andh WR 121= (AIR 1966 Andh Pra 361), one of Munikanniah J. in Vasudev Reddy v. Venkata Reddy, 1962 (2) Andh WR 462 = (AIR 1963 Andh Pra 232) and one of Chandrasekhara Sastry, J. , in Venkata Rao v. Ch. Sattaiah, 1964 (2) Andh WR (SN) 43 on the other, involving the determination of the scope and ambit of S. 47 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 921 of 1961) hereinafter called "the Tenancy Act ). These several appeals and revision petition challenge the validity of (a) agreement of sale entered into between vendor and vendee t