« ПредишнаНапред »
estates into one Regulation. This provided that joint estates might be divided at the instance of some of the sharers as well as of all of them.1 It re-enacted the provision of Regulation XXV of 1793 that, when two or more estates were originally specific and ascertained portions of the same zemindary, talook, or chowdrai, and had come into the possession of one person, or of several sharers, such estates might be registered and held as one estate.' In the case of one sharer having a dwelling-house, which is situated in a village or mehal which may be included in the estate of another, the proprietor of such house may retain it, paying an equitable rent for the ground; and the particulars shall be stated in the paper of partition.* Tanks, reservoirs, watercourses, and embankments are to be considered as attached to the land for the benefit of which they were originally made.4 The proprietors are bound to furnish accounts to enable the Ameen to assess the jumma on the shares.5 And it is provided that in certain cases the parties may themselves make a partition or appoint an arbitrator for that purpose.6 The Regulation provides for the division of estates held khas or let in farm by Government,7 and the same explanation is given of the joint estates contemplated by the Regulation as in Regulation I of 1801, section 12.8
With regard to voluntary alienation of interests in land, the zemindar's right to alienate was placed at the Permanent Settlement on a more secure basis. Before the Permanent Settlement, by the Regulations of 25th April 1788, article 41, the Board of Revenue was empowered to authorise
Zemindar's right of alienation.
• S. 6.
• S. 9.
4 8. 10.
• 8. 17.
• S. 22.
7 8. 29.
• S. 30.
POWER OF ALIENATION. 387
alienations: the zemindar might, with the sanction of Lkctuks the Board, mortgage or sell, the transaction being registered — by the sudder canoongoe, and the Board being satisfied that it was voluntary. Such alienations were, however, to be discouraged : and the Board was to take care that the Government dues were not thereby endangered. By the Decennial Settlement Regulations of 23rd November 1791, article 75, it is provided that, after the conclusion of that settlement, the landholders may borrow money on credit of their lands, and may sell and dispose of them under certain restrictions to be thereafter established. And by section 67, clause 2 of Regulation VIII of 1793, all bond fide transfers of zemindaries and other estates or talooks made by any actual proprietor of land or dependent talookdar after the 8th June 1787 are to be deemed valid, although made without the sanction of the Board of Revenue; and all actual proprietors of land and dependent talookdars are to be held to have been at liberty since the 29th October 1790 to borrow money without the sanction of the Board. By Regulation I of 1793, the Governor-General in Council declares in order to remove any doubt that zemindars, independent talookdars, and other actual proprietors of land are privileged to transfer to whomsoever they may think proper by sale, gift, or otherwise, their proprietary rights in the whole or part of their estates, without the sanction of Government; and that all such transfers, if according to law, will be held valid. In the preamble to Regulation II of 1723 this privilege is referred to as one not previously enjoyed by the zemindars and other proprietors.
By the Regulations of 23rd November 1791, the zemin- z«mia<i«r'i dar or other proprietor might let such of his lands as were leu*. not thereby otherwise provided for in such manner as ha
388 POWER TO LEASE.
Lecturk might think fit subject to certain restrictions.1 This was — re-enacted by Regulation VIII of 1793, section 52. But the power thus given was materially affected by Regulation XLIV of 1793, which recites that there is danger that the proprietors may dispose of dependent talooks at a reduced jumma, and thereby endanger the payment of revenue, if the jumma fixed should be insufficient to meet the claim for revenue; besides injuring their heirs. Moreover, such engagements are repugnant to the ancient and established usages of the country, whereby the dues of Government, which consist of a certain proportion of the produce of every beegah in money or kind, are inalienable without its express sanction. As therefore the proprietors of land were not, before the Decennial Settlement, entitled to enter into any engagements with their dependent talookdars, under-farmers, or ryots for a period extending beyond their own engagements, it is enacted that no zemindar, independent talookdar, or other actual proprietor shall dispose of a dependent talook to be held for more than ten years at a fixed jumma, or shall fix the jumma of an existing talook for more than ten years, or let any lands in farm, or grant pottahs to ryots or other persons for the cultivation of lands for a longer period. And the leases or terms that may be granted are not to be renewed before the last year of the term. This was repealed by Regulation V of 1812, section 2. By section 6 nothing in this Regulation is to be construed to prohibit any zemindar, independent talookdar, or other actual proprietor of land from selling, giving, or otherwise disposing of any part of his lands as a dependent talook: nor, by section 7 to authorise
1 Art. 55.
POWER TO LEASE. 389
the assessment of any increase upon the lands of such Lkcturk dependent talookdars as were exempted from enhance- — ment under Regulation VIII of 1793, section 51, clause 1 (this section also protects the pottah talookdars—Regulation VIII of 1793, section 19): nor by section 8 to prohibit actual proprietors from granting leases or pottahs to any person, not being a British subject or European, for any term of years or in perpetuity, for the erection of dwelling-houses, or buildings for carrying on manufactures, or for gardens or other purposes, and for offices for such houses or buildings. These provisions are now repealed as obsolete by Act XXIX of 1871. Under this Regulation a grant at a fixed rent would not be a void grant, but only void as to the fixed rent.1 And an engagement with a former proprietor to hold a talook in perpetuity as an independent talook at a fixed rent was as against a purchaser of the zemindary partly at an auction-sale for arrears of revenue, and partly privately, held good for a term of ten years, but not for the fixed rent." Regulation V of 1812, by section 2, repeals the prohibition against leases for more than ten years, and gives the proprietors of land liberty to lease for any period they may choose and in any form. This provision is explained by Regulation XVIII of 1812, section 2, to mean that, although the leases granted may be at any rent, and even in perpetuitythey cannot extend beyond the grantor's interest.3
With regard to the succession to the zemindary, we have Succession to seen that in many cases primogeniture prevailed, especially
1 Morley's Digest, Vol. I, p. 410, pi. 38. * lb., 411, pi. 40, and see p. 418, pi. 30.
'See Regulation XIV of 1812 and Act XVI of 1842 (repealed as obsolete by Act VIII of 1868).
SUCCESSION TO ZEMINDARIES.
Lkcture in the larger zemindaries.1 And it is clear that the State —— exercised some control over the succession up to the thus of the Permanent Settlement.2 Regulation XI of 1793 deals with this matter; and recites that by custom "originating in considerations of financial convenience" soma of the most extensive zemindaries descended by primogeniture: that such a custom is repugnant both to Hindoo and Mahomedan laws, and subversive of the rights of the other members of the family, who would otherwise be entitled to share in these as in all other estates: that it likewise hinders improvements "from the proprietors of those large estates not having the means, or being unable to bestow the attention, requisite for bringing into cultivation the extensive tracts of waste land comprised in them." And the financial obstacles to division being now removed by the Permanent Settlement and the rules for division of zemindaries, it is enacted that, after the 1st of July 1794, if a zemindar, independent talookdar, or other actual proprietor of land shall die without a will, or a written or verbal disposition of his property, it shall go to his heirs." These heirs may continue to hold jointly or may have a division of the estate under Regulation XXV of 1793, and any two or more of them may hold their shares jointly.* When the holding is joint a manager is required to be appointed,5 under Regulation VIII of 1793; but this pro
1 See the zemindar's position discussed—Rajah Lilanund Sing Bahadoor v. Government of Bengal, 6 Moore's I. A., 101, at p. 108; and for an instance of primogeniture, see Ilawut Urjun Sing r. Rawut Ghunsiam Sing, 5 Moore's I. A., 169.
• Morley's Digest, Vol. I, 412.
• S. 2.
• S. 3.