https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174090 In revision under Section 21 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973, the High Court could not reappreciate or overturn the Appellate Tribunal's pure findings of fact unless a jurisdictional error was shown, because the revisional power was confined on the lines of Section 115 CPC. Under Section 7(1), genuine transfers were not enough to exclude land from ceiling computation; the transferor had to rebut the statutory presumption by proving that the transfers were not made in anticipation of, or to defeat, the ceiling law and were supported by compelling necessity. The Supreme Court therefore restored the Tribunal's order and upheld interference under Article 136. en-us Wed, 06 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174090 In revision under Section 21 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973, the High Court could not reappreciate or overturn the Appellate Tribunal's pure findings of fact unless a jurisdictional error was shown, because the revisional power was confined on the lines of Section 115 CPC. Under Section 7(1), genuine transfers were not enough to exclude land from ceiling computation; the transferor had to rebut the statutory presumption by proving that the transfers were not made in anticipation of, or to defeat, the ceiling law and were supported by compelling necessity. The Supreme Court therefore restored the Tribunal's order and upheld interference under Article 136. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 06 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174090