« ПредишнаНапред »
beneficial purposes, such lands continuing to be used for the purposes specified in the leases. By Act XI of 1859, section 37, clause 4, and Act VII of 1868 (B.C.), section 12, this exception is modified and includes leases or tenures of lands whereon dwelling-houses, manufactories, or other permanent buildings have been erected; or whereon permanent? gardens, plantations, tanks, wells, canals, places of worship, or burning or burying grounds have been made, or wherein mines have been sunk. And it is further provided that such a purchaser as aforesaid of an estate or tenure shall be entitled to proceed, in the manner prescribed by law, for enhancement of the rent of any land within this clause, if he can prove the same to have been held at what was originally an unfair rent, and if the same shall not have been held at a fixed rent equal to the rent of good arable land for a term exceeding twelve years; but not otherwise.5
(5.) By Act XII of 1841, section 27, clause 6, and Act I of 1845, section 26, clause 5, an exception is also made of farms granted in good faith at fair rents and for specified areas by a former proprietor for terms not exceeding twenty years, under written leases registered within a month from their date. Provided that written notice be given to the Collector, who shall be at liberty to object if the revenue is likely to be affected. The purchaser may set aside such farms by a suit if not granted in good faith and at fair rents. This provision is repealed by Act XI of 1859.
Act XI of 1859, section 37, and Act VII of 1868 (B.C.),
section 14, further provide that nothing in the before mentioned provisions shall entitle any such purchaser as before mentioned to eject any ryot having a right of occupancy at a fixed rent, or at a rent assessable according to fixed rules under the laws in force; or to enhance the rent of such ryots otherwise than in the manner prescribed by such laws, or otherwise than the former proprietor, irrespectively of all engagements made since the time of settlement, may have been entitled to do.
Leases of lands coming under clause 4, section 37 of Act XI of 1859 may be registered at the holder's option, and tenures under clauses 1 and 2 also, but only in the special register.
With regard to estates in districts not permanently settled, Act XII of 1841, section 28, and Act I of 1845, section 27, provide that the purchaser shall acquire such estates free of incumbrances imposed since the time of settlement; and that he may avoid and annul all the tenures which may have originated with the defaulter or his predecessors; following substantially the description in Regulation XI of 1822, section 30. And it further provides that nothing in the Acts shall entitle any purchaser of land at a public sale to demand a higher rate of rent from any person whose tenure or agreement may be annulled as aforesaid than was demandable by the former malgoozar, except in cases in which such persons may have held their lands under engagements and circumstances such as are described in Regulation XI of 1822, section 32. Act XI of 1859, section 52, is substantially the same as this section.
By section 29 of Act XII of 1841, the Local Government may direct the sale for arrears to be made, subject to such
of the encumbrances upon it as it may think fit." This provision is not now in force.
When & share is sold under section 13 or section 14 of Act XI of 1859, it is subject to incumbrances, and passes only the right, title and interest of the defaulter. So sales of lakhiraj tenures under section 9 of Act VII of 1868 (B.C.). This last Act adds by section 12 “tenures," as defined by that Act and as before described, to the interests which may be sold free from incumbrances; and it adds also an exception from annulment of tenures created or recognised by the settlement proceedings of any current temporary settlement, as tenures bearing a rent which is fixed for the period of such settlement. I have already noticed the provisions of section 14 of Act VIII of 1869 (B.C.), re-enacting section 13 of Act X of 1859, which prohibits the enhancement of rent of a tenure cancelled by an auction-sale without a certain notice. This completes our consideration of the revenue sale laws, the main features of which as regards the purchaser are summed up in the decision that the purchaser at a revenue sale does not derive his title from the defaulter and is not in privity with him.
· Repealed and re-enacted by Act I of 1845, s. 28; repealed by Act XI of 1859.
• Moonshee Buzlool Rahman o. Pran Dhun Dutt, 8 W. R., 222.
REMEDIES FOR THE RECOVERY OF RENT. LAKBIRAJ
AND SERVICE TENURES.
Remedies for the recovery of rent-Imprisonment and corporal punishment pro
hibited—Remedy by imprisonment restoredRemedies against khoodkashtsDistraint-Remedies when distraint ineffectual-Distraint under Acts I of of 1859 and VIII of 1869 (B.C.)- Ejectment-Personal liability of defaulterSale--Avoidance of incumbrances-Stoppage of sale by nnder-tenant-Sale under Act X of 1859 and subsequent Acts—Stoppage of sale-Sale at instance of sharer in joint estate-Avoidance of incumbrances-Unregistered tenantsAssignments of revenue and resumption thereof—Revenue-free grants made before 12th August 1765-Revenue-free grants made since 12th August 1765 and before 1st December 1790—Revenue-free grants made since 1st December 1790—Badshahee grants-Resumption-Provisions where lakhiraj and proprietary rights are distinct-Requisites of lakhiraj grants anterior to British rule-Further provisions-Cases upon resumption-Lands held upon service
tenures-Ghatwallee tenures–Mokuddum tenures. Remedies for The remedies for the recovery of revenue bave, for the the recovery of rent.
most part, been extended to the recovery of rent also.
The Regulations of 29th April 1789 authorised the Collector to proceed against the talookdars and other inferior renters paying revenue to the zemindars in the same way as was prescribed by the Regulations for proceedings against defaulting renters paying revenue direct to
Government." Imprisonment Personal punishment was one of the original remedies, and corporal punishment” as in the case of the zemindar. But the Regulations of prohibited.
20th July 1792 forbade this, and provided that any landholder or farmer confining a ryot or inflicting corporal punishment upon him for arrears of rent should lose the arrears and besides be subject to a prosecution for assault
· Colebrooke's Supplement, 492.
or false imprisonment. This provision is re-enacted in the LECTURE amended Regulations contained in Regulation XVII of 1793, section 28, with the omission of the penalty of loss of the arrears. And the latter section was repealed by Act X of 1859, section 1.
We have seen that the arrears of revenue might be Remedy by recovered by sale after the Permanent Settlement; but the restored. zemindar could only distrain for his rent, and that under many restrictions, the tyranny of the zem indars being the evil chiefly guarded against. It was found, however, that the powers of distraint given to the zemindars were of little use; and the zemindar's land could be sold for arrears of revenue long before he could realise his rent by any process of law. Thus in Banaressy Ghose's case the Rajah was imprisoned for default while his ryots evaded payment. Regulation XXXV of 1795 was passed to remove these difficulties, but it was ineffective. It allowed defaulters to be innprisoned upon an application to the Court in cases of arrears over Rs. 500.5 The difficulties of the zemindars were further provided against by Regulation VII of 1799, to be hereafter noticed in detail. This Regulation proved beneficial. It repealed the limit of Rs. 500, and provided that after demand of arrears from the defaulter and his surety, or without demand if he have reason to believe that the defaulter or his surety is
| Art. 27.