X. unregistered tenant. It is laid down as a general principle LECTURE that the zemindar need not look beyond the registered tenant, unless he has taken rent from an unregistered tenant, or otherwise recognised him; and when suing the registered tenant for arrears of rent under Regulation VIII of 1819, section 8, he need give no notice to the unregistered tenant. I shall hereafter discuss the provisions of Regulation VIII of 1819, the principles of which are applicable to the present subject. Here I may notice that if a putnee is registered in the name of only one co-sharer, the whole tenure may be sold for arrears of rent in a suit against that shareholder. So where the landlord sold for arrears of rent a tenure registered in the name of the owner's mother, the sale passed the rights of the owner; and under a subsequent purchase by the plaintiff of the owner's interest nothing passed.5 The landlord, in short, may treat a transfer without registration as a nullity, and may hold his registered tenant still liable for rent. But 'Nobeen Kishen Mookerjee v. Shib Pershad Pattuck, 8 W. R., 96. Kasheenath Puree v. Luchmonee Pershad Patnaik, 19 W. R., 99. Sonaoolah v. Ranee Rajeshurree, S. D. A. (1857), 492. Thakoorchund Banerjee v. Shurnumnissa Khatoon, ib., 808. Nubo Coomar Ghose v. Kishen Chunder Banerjee, W. R. (1864), Act X, 112. Gudadhur Banerjee v. Khetter Mohun Surmah, 7 W. R., 460. Huro Mohun Mookerjee v. Goluck Chunder Sircar, 12 W. R., 265. Bharut Roy v. Gunga Narain Mohapatur, 14 W. R., 211. • Nobeen Kishen Mookerjee v. Shib Pershad Pattuck, 9 W. R., 161. Dhunput Singh Roy Bahadoor v. Vellayet Ali, ib., 211. Sadhan Chunder Bose v. Gurucharan Bose, 8 B. L. R., 6 (note). Raghub Chunder Banerjee v. Brojonath Koondoo Chowdhree, 14 W. R., 489. * Fatima Khatun v. The Collector of Tipperah, 8 B. L. R., 4 (note). 6 • Petumburee Dossea v. Chuckoo Ram Singh, S. D. A. (1846), 372. Anundlall Mookerjee v. Kalika Persad Misser, 12 B. L. R., 489 (note). Luckhinarain Mitter v. Khettro Pal Singh Roy, 13 B. L. R., 146. X. LECTURE by recognising an unregistered transfer he affirms the tenancy. Such recognition may be inferred from the receipt of rent; and before Act X of 1859 came into operation receipt of rent for a portion of a ryot's holding was held a sufficient recognition of a transfer of that portion as a separate holding. And where the landlord refused an application by the plaintiff for registration of a transfer of a tenure, but gave the plaintiff a pottah, and afterwards brought a suit against the registered tenant for arrears of rent, and at a sale under a decree in such suit bought the tenure for Rs. 2, it was held that he took nothing as against the plaintiff under such sale, independently of the question whether his purchase was not fraudulent. 'Sarkies v. Kali Coomar Roy, W. R. (1864), Act X, 98. Mooktokashee Dassia v. Brojundro Coomar Roy, 3 W. R., Act X, 156. Meah Jan Munshi v. Kurrunamaye Debi, 8 B. L. R., 1. Allender v. Dwarkanath Roy, 15 W. R., 320. See also Chunder Coomar Roy v. Pearee Lal Banerjee, 6 W. R., 190. Abdool Kurreem v. Munsoor Ali, 12 W. R., 396. 2 Mojon Mollo v. Dula Gazi Kulan, 12 B. L. R., 492 (note). LECTURE XI. THE PUTNEE TALOOK-REMEDIES FOR RECOVERY OF talook. The putnee talook-Remedies for recovery of revenue-Imprisonment-Sale of land-Dispossession-Attachment of land-Personal liability-Interest on arrears-Sale of estate or tenure-Regulatior XI of 1822-Act XII of 1841 and subsequent Acts-Definition of arrear-Payment or tender of arrearDeposit of arrear by person other than defaulting proprietor-Exemption of certain estates from sale-Annulment of sale-Finality of sale-Registration of shares of an estate-Resale on default by purchaser to pay purchasemoney-Registration of talookdary and other similar tenures-Sale of tenures not being estates-Avoidance of incumbrances. BEFORE proceeding to consider the remedies for the non- The putnee payment of revenue and rent, it may be useful to give some account of the putnee talook. The putnee talook is nothing more than a perpetual lease of a talook or zemindary. Regulation VIII of 1819 deals with this tenure, which had its origin on the estate of the Rajah of Burdwan. The Regulation recites that by the rules of the Permanent Settlement, the proprietors of revenue-paying estates, that is, the individuals answerable to Government for the revenue then assesed on the different mehals, were declared entitled to make any arrangements for the leasing of their lands in talooks or otherwise which they might deem most conducive to their interests, subject, by Regulation XLIV of 1793, to two limitations: first, that the jumma or rent should not be fixed for more than ten years; and second, that in case of sale for arrears of revenue, such leases or arrangements should stand cancelled from the day of sale. The preamble then recites the repeal of the limitation to ten years by Regulation V of 1812, section 2; and that by XI. LECTURE Regulation XVIII of 1812, zemindars were at liberty to grant talooks or other leases of their lands fixing the rent in perpetuity at their discretion, but still subject to the liability to be dissolved on a sale of the grantor's estate for arrears of revenue in the same manner as before. It then recites that perpetual leases at a fixed rent had always been common, but it had been omitted to declare in Regulations V and XVIII of 1812, whether such tenures, created in violation of Regulation XLIV of 1793, section 2, should be deemed void. The preamble further describes the nature of a putnee talook as a talook created by the zemindar to be held at a rent fixed in perpetuity by the lessee and his heirs for ever, the lessee giving collateral security for his conduct and for the rent at the zemindar's discretion; but that if the original tenant is excused from giving such security, any new tenant is still liable to give such security. It is recited that by the terms of the engagement the tenure may be sold for arrears of rent; and if the proceeds realised are insufficient to pay such arrears, the remaining property of the defaulter is answerable. It is further recited that the talooks are sublet as durputnee talooks on the same terms, and again sublet by the durputneedars as seputnee talooks. The engagements, it is stated, do not show whether upon a sale the tenant is entitled to any surplus proceeds, nor do they prescribe the mode of sale; and neither the Regulations nor usage supply these omissions; these are dealt with by the Regulation in question. This Regulation first declares all such tenures valid although created before Regulation V of 1812, and although in violation of section 2 of Regulation XLIV of 1793. But nothing in the Regulation is to be held to exempt any tenures held under engagements from proprietors of revenue paying estates from liability to be cancelled on sale of the said estates for arrears of revenue under section 5 of Regulalation XLIV of 1793, unless specially exempted by that section or some other specific rule of the Regulations.1 By section 3 it is enacted, (1) that putnee talooks, as described in the preamble, shall be deemed to be valid tenures in perpetuity according to the terms of the engagements under which they are held. They are heritable by their conditions, and are by the section further declared capable of being transferred by sale, gift, or otherwise, at the discretion of the holder, as well as answerable for his personal debts, and subject to the process of the Courts in the same manner as other real property. (2) Putnee talookdars are declared to possess the right of letting out the lands composing their talooks in any manner they may deem most conducive to their interests, such engagements to bind the parties, their heirs and assignees, but not to operate to the prejudice of the zemindar's right to hold the superior tenure answerable for any arrear of his rent in the state in which he granted it and free of all incumbrances resulting from the act of his tenant. (3) In case of arrears occurring upon any tenure of the description alluded to in clause 1 of this section, it shall not be liable to be cancelled under Regulation VII of 1799, section 15, but the tenure shall be sold by public auction, and the holder of the tenure shall be entitled to the surplus proceeds beyond the rent due, subject however to section 17 of this Regulation. I shall hereafter refer again to this and other provisions for sale. By section 4, the durputneedar and seputneedar, &c., stand in the same position to their respective lessors as the putneedar occupies with LECTURE |