1. This is an appeal in a land acquisition case. The land acquired was held as a widows estate by one Nanjammal. An award was passed for a sum of Rs. 2,107, to which she did not object. A reference was, however, made to the Court under S.18, of the Act at the instance of her two daughters and their sons, who claimed compensation to the amount of about Rs, 20,000. The Subordinate Judge raised the compensation to over Rs. 4,000 and the daughters and their sons appeal.

2. A question has been raised whether the reversioners had such an interest in the land as to entitte them to claim a reference. A similar question was raised in the case reported Gopayya v. Deputy Collector of Tenali A. I. R. 1922 Mad. 100 but was not decided for there the widow had surrendered her estate to the reversioner after her claim but before the reference. It .has been held in Brij Kishore Lal v. Pratap Narain [1919]4 Pat. L. J. 360 that a reversioner has an interest which entitles him to protect the corpus of the estate. That decision has been followed by Ramesam, J. in Adanamoli Chetti v. Chinnasami Reddi A. I. R. 1926 Mad. 959 In view of all that has happened in this particular case, we think it bett