Page:Gazetteer of the province of Oudh ... (IA cu31924073057352).pdf/133

PAR 125 tion of the under-proprietor in sub-settled estates restricted by the same rules. Custom as regards ex-proprietors and tenants with a right of occu- pancy. The next class is composed of those persons who are ex-proprietors, but who are possessed of an under-proprietary right in their sír and sáyar lands; (the latter including grove lands); of tenants with a right of occu- pancy, and those who have purchased or have otherwise acquired proprie- tary or under-proprietary rights in any portion of the village lands." These persons pay the rent which has been assessed upon their holdings through the superior holder or málguzár. Now, it is obvious that they can plant to any extent they please, so long as they continue to discharge their liabilities. But what is the effect of cutting down their groves, and so increasing the cultivated area of their holdings? The custom, as ascer- tained in this district, authorizes the superior holder in such cases to demand rent so soon as the land thus cleared is brought under the plough, no matter whether, as grove land, it had been held rent-free for genera- tions. Occasionally, in the case of an ex-proprietor, the taluqdar will refrain from exercising this power; but, as a rule, it is freely exercised, and in the case of purchasers and other outsiders without mercy or com- punction. It is a custom which, supplementing as it does the local rules regarding the larger wooded areas, has a direct tendency to preserve intact the smaller plantations. Custom as regards tenants-at-will.—The third and last class consists of tenants-at-will, and as the groves occupied by these form a very con- siderable proportion of the entire timber lands of the district, it is of the utmost importance to carefully record in the "Wajib-ul-arz" (administration paper) the customs and usages which prevail with regard to their tenure of such lands, as well as the relations which in this respect, subsist between them and thelandlord. First of all, it by no means follows that because a cultivator has been forced through enhancement of rent, or by other circumstances, to relinquish his holding, he is therefore obliged to abandon his grove also. My experience in this and the adjoining district of Sultanpur, has con- vinced me that so long as the cultivator remains in the village, he retains a lien on his grove, even though dispossessed of his cultivated holding. There is one general exception to this rule, however, and this I can better describe with the aid of an illustration than in abstract terms. For in- stance A, a cultivator, has a bolding of 10 bígbas for which he pays a rent of Rs. 40. He asks B, his landlord, for two bighas more, for the pur- pose of planting a grove. B, consents and gives A. two bighas of waste or cultivated land for the purpose required. No rent is charged for this two bíghas, but the rent on the holding is raised from Rs. 40 to 50. A. sets to work and plants the two bíghas with trees. In the event of ouster, A. loses trees and all. If, on the other hand, A, content with his original 10 bíghas, plants a grove in one bigha, and continues to pay Rs. 40 rent for the remaining 9 bíghas, he still retains possession of his trees if ousted from his cultivated holding. Usufruct and timber.--As regards the usufruct, with the exception of the mahua tree, the right of the planter of the grove is complete. I shall