Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.

1. This revision petition raises the question whether an appeal lies from the decision of a Subordinate Judge appointed by the Provincial Government under Section 3(d) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to decide a dispute referred by the Collector under Section 30 of the Act. That section empowers the Collector to refer to "the Court" a dispute as to the apportionment of the amount of compensation settled under Section 11 or as to the persons to whom the compensation is payable. Section 3(d) defines the word "Court" as meaning a principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction, unless the Provincial Government has appointed (as it is empowered to do) a special judicial officer to perform the functions of the Court. In this case the Government of Madras appointed the Subordinate Judge of Salem to perform the functions of the Court under the Act. The petitioner was dissatisfied with the decision of the Subordinate Judge and filed an appeal to the District Judge of Salem, but the District Judge dismissed the appeal on the ground that it was incompetent by reason of the decision of this Court in Krishnamoorthi Aiyar v. The Special Deputy Collector