ANNE SEETHARAMAYYA Vs. GUNDI VENKATESHWARA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is the Plaintiff. The suit is filed for recovery of the sum of Rs. 656-60 p. on the basis of the promissory note executed by the defendant on 9-10-1974 in favour of the plaintiff. The plea of the defendant is that he actually received Rs. 400/- only and though he owned Ac.1-95 cents of wet land originally i.e. prior to March, 1976, Ac. 0-50 cents of land was sold in March, 1976 and Ac. 1-07 cents of land was gifted in favour of his daughter and his wife owns ac. 0-30 cents of wet land in Allapuram village. The alienations were made in March, 1976 and he is a small farmer by the time Act 7 of 1977 came into foree. The trial court framed the following issues viz., whether the promissory note is not supported by consideration to a tune of R. 200/- and whether Act 24 of 1976 applies? The additional issue is to this effect:-

(2.) The trial court held that the promissory note is supported by consideration. It was further held that in view of holding of Ac. 1-95 cents of wet land prior to March, 1976 the alienations are not hit by Act 24/76 and he is a small farmer entitled to the benefits under Act 7/77.

(3.) The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is two fold viz., that the alienations made by the defendant are in the teeth of embargo under Act 24/76 and the alienations should not be computed for the purpose of considering the applicability of benefits under Act 7/77. The learned counsel for the respondent contended that the defendant was not a small farmer during the crucial time when Act 24/76 is applicable and as such the alienations cannot be considered as a bar to the claim for the benefits under Act 7 of 1977 and Act 24/76 being a temporary enactment is not effective after expiry and further the crucial 'date for the purpose of determination whether the defendant is a small farmer is 29-12-1976 on which date Act 7/77 came into force and the antecedent events have no impact.