334 POSITION OF SUBORDINATE HOLDERS. down with respect to bunkur, or the right to use all wood of spontaneous growth upon the zemindary.1 The general effect of the Permanent Settlement upon the position of the zemindar was that the zemindar was now detached from the Government, and lost some of his former privileges and 'emoluments, while the revenue demanded from him seems to have been very heavy considering the restrictions to which he was theoretically subject. In practice however he continued his exactions in much the same way as before; and from the slender provision made for the protection of the ryots he was enabled to assume a position of preponderating influence, while his ample power of alienation enabled him to elude much of the Government demand. I come now to consider the position of the subordinate holders or, as we may now call them, tenants. In the earlier times of British rule, the main care of the Government was to protect the ryots and apparently to reduce the zemindars to what was considered their original position; the zemindars in fact seem to have been looked upon as tyrannical officials. The Regulations of the 14th May 17722 for the farming settlement provide that the farmers shall not receive from the ryots more than the amount stipulated for by the pottah; and the directions as to the settlement to be made at the end of the five years contemplated compelling the zemindars to give pottahs, which as 3 1 Byjnauth Mojmoodar v. Deen Dyal Gooptu, 2 Sel. Rep., 105. 3 Ib., 207. Harington's Analysis, Vol. II, 35. For a specimen of a pottah, see Baboo Dhunput Singh v. Gooman Singh, 11 Moore's I. A. 433, at p. 434; and of a cabooleut, Golam Ali v. Baboo Gopal Lal Thakoor, 9 W. R., 65, at p. 67. IX. we have seen were seldom given at this time. By the Regu- LECTURE lations of the 8th June 1787, the Collectors were directed to endeavour to fix some mode of fair assessment of the ryots, and to prevent the imposition of new abwabs and taxes. The Regulations for the Decennial Settlement provided for authorized forms of pottahs being drawn up of which the ryots were to have notice, and pottahs were to be granted to them accordingly, specifying the rent or, where that could not be specified, the rate, with all other terms and conditions. No other agreements were to be permitted. But the rents to be demanded were not limited by the assessment of the jumma upon the zemindars; the zemindars being at liberty to demand what rent they thought fit, subject to the restrictions imposed upon them,3 one of which was that the rent must be an entire sum, consolidating the abwabs lawfully chargeable with the assul or original rent. The provisions for compulsory preparation of pottahs, and for invalidating all but those duly authorized, were rescinded by Regulation V of 1812, section 3; and it was declared by that Regulation that proprietors might lease their lands in such form as the parties chose. By section 2 of Act X of 1859, and section 2 of Act VIII of 1869 (B.C.), every ryot is entitled to receive from the person to whom the rent of the land held or cultivated by him is payable a pottah containing the following particulars :the quantity and boundaries of the land, and where fields 'Colebrooke's Supplement, 253. Harington's Analysis, Vol. II, 53. 2 Regulations of 23rd November 1791, arts. 59 to 62. Regulation I of 1793, ss. 56 to 59. The notice to the ryots was dispensed with by Regulation I of 1793. 3 Regulations of 23rd November 1791, arts. 45, 55, 57. Regulation I of 1793, ss. 52, 54. LECTURE Cabooleuts. 2 have been numbered in a Government survey, the number of each field; the amount of annual rent, the instalments in which the same is to be paid, and any special conditions of the lease; or if the rent is payable in kind, the proportion of produce to be delivered, and the time and manner of delivery. Ryots who have held at fixed rates of rent, which have not been changed from the time of the Permanent Settlement, are entitled to receive pottahs at those rates. Ryots having rights of occupancy, but not holding at fixed rates, are entitled to receive pottahs at fair and equitable rates. Ryots not having rights of occupancy are entitled to pottahs only at such rates as may be agreed upon between them and the persons to whom the rent is payable. I shall refer more fully to the position of occupancy ryots hereafter, and to their right to pottahs. Every person who grants a pottah is entitled to receive from the person to whom the pottah is granted a cabooleut, or counterpart engagement, in conformity with the tenor of the pottah. The tender to any ryot of a pottah, such as the ryot is entitled to receive, shall be held to entitle the person to whom the rent is payable to receive a cabooleut from such ryot. In order to entitle a landlord to sue under this section he must have tendered to the ryot before suit brought a pottah such as the ryot is entitled to receive. When a decree is given for the delivery of a pottah, if the person required by the decree to grant such 1 Act X of 1859, s. 3. Act VIII of 1869 (B.C.), s. 3. Akhoy Sunker Chuckerbutty v. Indro Bhoosun Deb Roy, 4 B. L. R., F. B., 58; 12 W. R., F. B., 27, s. c. Thakooranee Dassee v. Bisheshur Mookerjee, B. L. R., Supp. Vol., 122: 3 W. R. (Act X) 29, s. c. pottah refuse or delay to grant the same, the Court may execute a pottah in conformity with the terms of the decree under the signature and seal of such Court: and such pottah shall be of the same force and effect as if granted by the person aforesaid.1 Similar provision is made for the case of refusal to execute a cabooleut: in such a case the decree shall be evidence of the amount of rent claimable, and a copy of the decree equivalent to a cabooleut." Pottahs are of various descriptions, not confined to interests in land, and are known under various names, as mokurreree, permanent or fixed; thika, specific; shurh mouzah, at the village rate; shurh pergunnah, at the pergunnah rate; bilmookta, adjusted; khoodkasht and paikasht; nowabad, for newly cultivated land; jungleboory, for clearing wood or cultivating waste; sayer, of the sayer duties; khalaree, for salt manufacture; shuhd, for making honey; mom, for making wax. LECTURE IX. talookdars. The talookdars were next in importance to the zemin- Dependent dars; and Lord Cornwallis could discover no difference between the two. Nevertheless, the majority of the talookdars were left to pay their revenue through the zemindars, and thus to fall into the position of tenants. The independent talookdars, on the other hand, were settled with in the same manner as the zemindars. The Deceninal Settlement Regulations endeavoured to secure the dependent talookdars from unauthorized exactions by making such exactions or oppression a ground for separation of the 4 1 Act X of 1859, s. 80. Act X of 1859, s. 81. Act VIII of 1869 (B.C.), s. 55. Act VIII of 1869 (B.C.), s. 56. Harington's Analysis, Vol. III, 353. Regulations of 23rd November 1791, arts. 4 to 7. Regulation I of 1793, ss. 5, 6, 8. LECTURE talook from the zemindary; but Regulation VIII of 1793 omitted this provision. With regard to jungleboory talooks, the nature of which is described in the Regulations, it is provided that they are not to be separated; although probably they were quite as much entitled to separation as those admitted to that privilege, since they were held by a title of the highest kind according to Hindoo and Mahomedan law, namely on the ground of having brought waste land into cultivation. With regard to the talooks ordered to be separated, it is provided that the holders of them are not to be permitted to pay their revenue through the zemindar. And the dependent talookdars were to have agreements for the same period as the zemindar's settlement,—that is, as would seem perpetual under the Permanent Settlement.5 Another class of talookdars is noticed in the Perpetual Settlement Regulations as a class of dependent talookdars whose talooks are held under writings or sunnuds from the zemindar or other actual proprietor which do not expressly transfer the property in the soil, but only entitle the talookdar to possession so long as he pays the rent and performs the conditions specified therein. These are considered leaseholders only and not actual proprietors of the soil; and provided they have still continued to pay rent to the zemindar are not entitled to separation.6 Regulations of 23rd November 1791, art. 5. 2 S. 6. See also Harington's Analysis, Vol. III, 353. Rouse's Dissertations, 51, 56. 4 Regulations of 23rd November 1791, art. 12. Regulation I of 1793, s. 12. 5 s. 84. Regulations of 23rd November 1791, art. 50. Regulation I of 1793, Regulation VIII of 1793, s. 7. |