1839.] Report on the District of Azimgurh. 109 



for 875 rupees by Tannee Rai, a distant relative of the proprietors, 

 and a resident on the estate, but not himself an owner before that 

 time. From the period of the purchase to the present day the 

 descendants of Tannee Rai held with the heirs of the original pro- 

 prietors, and all paid Beegah-dam, but till sometime after the ces- 

 sion, the family of Tannee Rai remained superior. About the year 

 1820, the descendants of one of the old branches sued for a quarter 

 share of the estate, and on inspection of the genealogical tree, and 

 a reference to the law officers of the Court, obtained a decree in 

 their favor. In this suit the real question was never brought forward, 

 nor the circumstances explained, under which the Tannee Rai branch 

 was introduced. This decree was never executed, but at the time 

 of settlement, the holders of the decree claimed execution of it from 

 the officer who was conducting the proceedings. They were of course 

 referred back to the Civil Court for an order on the Collector to give 

 possession under the decree, and at the same time a proceeding was 

 held, setting forth all the peculiar features of the case for the con- 

 sideration of the Court Now we are able to perceive in this particu- 

 lar case the origin of the tenure, and the means whereby a new 

 branch was introduced amongst the community of proprietors, alien 

 to the original stock, but still possessed of rights in reality far stronger 

 than any of the others. The principle of the Civil Court's decision 

 went to the exclusion of these, in fact, the rightful owners, and whose 

 proprietary tenure had been sanctioned by the uninterrupted possession 

 of upwards of 100 years. Similarly good reasons, no doubt, often exist, 

 though the trace of them has been lost, for the numerous apparent 

 anomalies, which exist in tenures of this description. The memory 

 of the transaction had been maintained by its comparatively recent 

 date, the high station of some of the parties concerned, and the ex- 

 istence of the Bazar, which was named in commemoration of it. 

 Similar transactions which were not rendered equally illustrious, 

 were doubtless often forgotten in the convulsions and revolutions of 

 former times. 



72nd. It is well to remark some of the incidents of this tenure, and 

 the points wherein they vary from each other. 



73rd. Sometimes the Sayer are divided according to hereditary 

 shares, sometimes according to the Seer ; the latter prevailing where 

 the shares are acknowledged, the former where they are unknown. 



74th. The sharers may themselves cultivate, or they may have the 

 option of under-letting their Seer. This depends more than any thing 

 else on the circumstances in life of the sharers. If they are respectable 

 men, who do not cultivate themselves, or have other means of liveli- 



Q 



