1839.] Report on the District of Azimgurh. 113 



may have cultivators under them. At the time of settlement the 

 extent of land held by them, and the conditions of their tenure, have 

 been clearly recorded. The proprietor is of course responsible to the 

 Government for the Jumma fairly assignable to their holding, but 

 he may sue them summarily for the amount, and on failure of pay- 

 ment may oust them or bring their tenures to sale. It may happen, 

 and it frequently does happen, especially in Talookahs, that a whole 

 Mouzah may thus be held as an under tenure by the old proprietors, 

 who are responsible to the Talookdar and not to the Government, and 

 who yet may manage the village concerns according to established 

 custom as a proprietary body. The provisions of Act viii. of 1835, 

 which authorizes the sale of under tenures of this sort, on failure to 

 pay the amount decreed in a summary suit, afford considerable faci- 

 lities for the realization of the rents from tenures of this description. 



88th. In the second class may be placed the former proprietors of 

 estates sold by auction for arrears of rent, as regarded their Seer 

 land — ousted proprietors, or old claimants of proprietary right, as 

 regards the land they have long had in possession, and generally those 

 who, whether actually resident in the village, or otherwise, may be 

 proved to have long held the same land on the same terms for a course 

 of years. The period which constitutes such prescriptive right has 

 been no where settled. It has been held, that land so possessed since 

 the cession may come within this class. A shorter period however 

 might fairly be assigned, and probably the Civil Courts would recog- 

 nize the term of twelve years as sufficient to constitute the claim. It 

 is not unfrequently the case that tenures of this sort originate in con- 

 tracts entered into by the Zemindars themselves, with cultivators 

 whom they may engage to bring waste land into tillage. 



89th. Now it is evident that all tenures of this kind are liable to 

 adjustment at the time of settlement. No proprietor is at liberty to 

 fix rates which should hold good beyond the term of his own tenure, 

 or lease, nor would the settling officer be justified in recognizing 

 rates which fall below the average of the Government demand, or the 

 fair proportion of assessment which may be levied from the fields in 

 question. It is sufficient that the fair rate fixed at the time of settle- 

 ment should be invariable during its duration, and that the extent 

 of land thus held, with the rate and right of permanency, should be 

 clearly defined. Of course if the holders of this land extend their 

 cultivation, and take other fields than those which they are recorded 

 to possess, they do not carry their privileges with them, but must 

 make their own terms with the Zemindars for their new requisitions. 



90th. The most perplexing cases of this sort which are likely to 



