- (1.) The only point for decision in these appeals by special leave is the correctness of the view taken by the High court in the impugned judgment that a company incorporated under the Companies Act is not obliged to file a declaration as required by Section 8 of the A. P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (for short "the Act") , This view has been taken by the High court in a revision filed against an order of the Land Reforms Appellate tribunal.
(2.) The view of the High court is based on GOMs No. 1637 of 14/12/19777 of the government of A. P. from which such an inference was drawn. The GOMs has later been rescinded by GOMs No. 1384 dated 29/8/1981. That apart, we have no doubt that the view taken by the High court is based on a misconstruction of the relevant provisions of the Act.
(3.) The definition of "person" in clause (o) of Section 3 is as under: "3.(O) 'person' includes an individual, a family unit; a trustee, a company, a firm, a society or an association of individuals, whether incorporated or not;"this definition clearly includes a company within the ambit of "person" for the purpose of the Act. Section 8 requires every person whose holding on the notified date exceeds the specified limit to submit a declaration as prescribed therein. The meaning of the word "person" in Section 8 has to be understood as defined in Section 3 (0 of the Act. It is, therefore, clear that a company is a "person" for the purpose of the Act and is required to comply with Section 8 of the Act. The contrary view taken by the High court cannot be sustained.;