1. We think that this matter ought not to have been decided in the way in which it has been done by the learned District Judge.
2. We are not inclined to attach much weight to the case of Land Acquisition Act, In the matter of 30 B. 275 : 7 Bom. L.R. 697 with reference to this question. It has always to be remembered that in cases of this kind petitions are put in by persona without any legal aid. Id is evident from the petition before the Court that the claimants were complaining that the award was extremely inadequate and that they were claiming Rs. 5,000 per bigha. There is nothing in the Land Acquisition Act which requires a claimant to state the grounds in detail upon which he claims a larger sum. Unfortunately the claimant has mixed up another matter with this claim, namely, about some land which he wanted to be acquired. This cannot clearly be a matter of reference. It also refers to another plot of land, and that matter was not asked to be referred to the Court but was for determination by the Collector.
3. We think that the reference ought to be heard and decided on its merits, namely, as to whether the award is inadequate and whether the claimant is entitled to the amount per bigha he claims.
4. Costs of this appeal will be costs in the references, We asses the hearing fee at three gold mohurs.