CHITTORI SWAMI Vs. RAVULA SURYANARAYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India was referred to a Division Bench by Ramachandra Rao, J. as the petitioner challenged the validity of the provisions of Sec. 8 of the Andhra Tenancy Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) The Petitioner is the landlord. The respondent-tenant filed an application under Sec. 8 of the Act for remission of rent on the ground that there was a failure of crops due to excessive rains and flooding of the crops by the rain water. The claim for remission was disputed by the landlord. The Tahsildar, on a consideration of the oral evidence in the case, held that the crops were damaged due to heavy rains and on the basis of the report of a Commissioner and making a further reduction on the ground that there was no crop at all in a small extent of Ac. 4-00 land, granted a remission of 125 bags of paddy whereas the agreed rent was 190 bags of paddy. The said remission was confirmed on appeal by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Aggrieved by the said decision in appeal, the landlord filed the above revision petition.

(3.) Sri Poornaiah, the learned counsel for the petitioner, raised two points for our consideration : firstly, that the provisions of section 8 of the Act are void and secondly, that in any event the Tahsildar ought to have granted remission on the basis of the Commissioner's report and that there was no justification for making a further reduction.