GATTINENI PEDA GOPAYYA Vs. DEPUTY COLLECTOR OF TENALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Acquiring Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,200 an acre, The widow Durgamma to whom the northern part of Survey No. 575 belonged at the time claimed at the rate of Rs. 1,400 an acre. After she had surrendered the estate to her husband's reversioners they claimed Rs. 2 1/2 a square yard, but the District Judge held that he was precluded by Section 25(1) of Act 1 of 1894 from awarding a higher amount than that claimed by the widow. In appeal the reversioners ask to be compensated at the rate of Rs. l 1/2 a square yard.

(2.) Upon the question of law, we are of opinion that Section 25 was designed with the purpose of holding claimants to their own bargains and of preventing demands being increased at every stage from the Collector to the High Court. The word applicant in this section is used to describe the person who puts in a written application under Section 18 for having his objection to the Collector's award referred for determination by a Civil Court. He is not necessarily identical with the person who makes a claim after notice under Section 9, All that Section 18 requires is that he should be a person interested who has not accepted the award, and a "person interested" is defined in Section 3 as including every person claiming an interest in compensation to be made on account of the acquisition. Under Section 25 claimants are estopped from getting more from the Judge than what they claimed before the Collector, and on the same principle their legal representatives would no doubt be bound. But although a widow represents her deceased husband's estate for certain purposes and has limited powers of disposal over it, the reversioners are not her legal representatives nor are they bound by her acts on any principle of estoppel. The Judge therefore should not have considered his award as limited to the amount claimed before the Acquiring Officer.

(3.) On the question of fact which is what is the market rate which the plots acquired would fetch at a fair computation, we are of opinion that 8 annas a square yard which is the rate awarded by the District Judge is too low. This land though hitherto used for wet cultivation is surrounded on all sides by lands which have been built upon and it will be suitable for building sites as soon as the level has been raised. In fact the purpose for which it has been acquired is the extension of the village site and this is an element for consideration in estimating its value, though under Section 24(1) the court is precluded from taking into consideration the increase of its value likely to arise from the use to which it will be put.