BASIREDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition by the declarants in C.C.Nos.2266/S/75 and 2267/S/75 on the file of the Land Reforms Tribunal, Sangareddy is directed against the order of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad in L.R.A.No. 534 of 1976.

(2.) The 1st petitioner is the father of the 2nd petitioner, the major married daughter and the 3rd petitioner is stated to be the illatom son-in-law of the 1st petitioner. The 1st petitioner claimed that he had taken the 3rd petitioner as the illatom son-in-law agreeing to give him a half share of his properties and giving the 2nd petitioner in marriage to him. Accordingly, the 1st petitioner filed a declaration and the 2nd and the 3rd petitioners filed separate declarations claiming that they have a half share in the properties standing in the name of the 1st petitioner. In support of their claim, they filed the illatom agreement dated 5-1-1960 marked as Ex. A.1 and the voters' list for the years 1970 and 1966 respectively marked as Exs. A2 and A.3 in which the 3rd petitioner is shown as residing in the same house as that of the 1st petitioner and the 2nd petitioner in the village of the 1st petitioner. The petitioners examined 4 witnesses. P.W.I is the 1st petitioner. P.W.2 is the 3rd petitioner. P.Ws. 3 and 4 are the attestors of the illatom agreement Ex.A.1. The original Tribunal merely referred to the evidence of these 4 witnesses but without rejecting their evidence observed, it is not the factum of illatom which is to be considered. But the point forconsideration is whether the illatom son-in-law can be treated asthe holder of the land". The Verification Officer appears to have reported that the declarant has no sons of his own and, therefore, took the husband of the 2nd declarant as illatom-son-in-law. He also reported that the 1st declarant executed a registered will dated 23-1-1960 stating that his illatom son-in-law would succeed to all the properties after his death and bequeathed survey No. 329 in favour of one Satyamma describing her as his wife.

(3.) The Original Tribunal observing that the will would come into force only after the death of the testator computed the entire extent in the holding of the 1st petitioner.