Current set CAPF · 2014 Q52

Not attempted Correct Incorrect ★ Bookmarked

Loading…

Q52 (CAPF/2014) History & Culture › Modern India (Pre-1857) › Land revenue settlements Answer Verified

The Permanent Settlement was rarely extended to other regions because :

A

increase in agricultural prices after 1810 increased the value of the harvest while the Permanent Settlement disallowed an increase in the State’s share

B

the economic theories of Ricardo influenced the policy makers

C

the State found it expedient to settle directly with the ryot

D

all of the above

Result

Your answer: — · Correct: D

Explanation

The Permanent Settlement was rarely extended beyond Bengal for several strategic and economic reasons. Firstly, after 1810, agricultural prices rose, increasing the value of the harvest; however, because the revenue was fixed in perpetuity, the colonial state could not claim any share of this enhanced income [1]. To maximize financial resources, the government shifted toward temporary settlements in newly annexed territories [1]. Secondly, the economic theories of David Ricardo significantly influenced policy makers, who argued that the state should claim the 'surplus' rent rather than letting it accrue to unproductive intermediaries like zamindars. Finally, the state found it more expedient to settle directly with the ryot (cultivator) to ensure a more flexible and direct revenue stream, leading to the adoption of the Ryotwari system in southern and western India [3]. Thus, all the provided reasons contributed to the decision not to extend the system.

Sources

[1] THEMES IN INDIAN HISTORY PART III, History CLASS XII (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 9: COLONIALISM AND THE COUNTRYSIDE > 3.2 A new revenue system > p. 247
[3] History , class XII (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.) > Chapter 9: Envisioning a New Socio-Economic Order > a) Zamindari Abolition > p. 117

How others answered

Each bar shows the % of students who chose that option. Green bar = correct answer, blue outline = your choice.

Community Performance

Out of everyone who attempted this question.

75%

got it right

SIMILAR QUESTIONS

Statement 1 : The Permanent Settlement was rarely extended to any region beyond Bengal. Statement I : After 1810, the agricultural prices declined affecting adversely the income of the Bengal Zamindars.

The question is based on the following passage : The permanent settlement vested the land ownership right in the zamindars, who previously enjoyed only revenue collecting rights. Therefore, those who lost out in this settlement were the peasants, who were left at the mercy of the zamindars. The customary occupancy right was ignored and they were reduced to the status of tenants. The provision of patta, or written agreement between the peasant and the zamindar providing a record of the amount of rent to be paid, was rarely followed by the zamindars. Nor was it liked by the peasants who always feared to lose in any formal record of rights and obligations, The burden of high revenue assessment was thus shifted to the peasants, who were often also called upon to pay illegal cesses. The subsequent regulations of 1799 and 1812 gave the zamindars the right to seize property of the tenants in case of non-payment of rent without any permission of a court of law. It is no wonder, therefore, that as a cumulative effect of this support to the coercive power of the zamindars, the condition of the actual cultivators declined under the Permanent Settlement. Before the permanent settlement the peasants enjoyed :

The question is based on the following passage : The permanent settlement vested the land ownership right in the zamindars, who previously enjoyed only revenue collecting rights. Therefore, those who lost out in this settlement were the peasants, who were left at the mercy of the zamindars. The customary occupancy right was ignored and they were reduced to the status of tenants. The provision of patta, or written agreement between the peasant and the zamindar providing a record of the amount of rent to be paid, was rarely followed by the zamindars. Nor was it liked by the peasants who always feared to lose in any formal record of rights and obligations, The burden of high revenue assessment was thus shifted to the peasants, who were often also called upon to pay illegal cesses. The subsequent regulations of 1799 and 1812 gave the zamindars the right to seize property of the tenants in case of non-payment of rent without any permission of a court of law. It is no wonder, therefore, that as a cumulative effect of this support to the coercive power of the zamindars, the condition of the actual cultivators declined under the Permanent Settlement. According to the passage, the permanent settlement vested ;

The question is based on the following passage : The permanent settlement vested the land ownership right in the zamindars, who previously enjoyed only revenue collecting rights. Therefore, those who lost out in this settlement were the peasants, who were left at the mercy of the zamindars. The customary occupancy right was ignored and they were reduced to the status of tenants. The provision of patta, or written agreement between the peasant and the zamindar providing a record of the amount of rent to be paid, was rarely followed by the zamindars. Nor was it liked by the peasants who always feared to lose in any formal record of rights and obligations, The burden of high revenue assessment was thus shifted to the peasants, who were often also called upon to pay illegal cesses. The subsequent regulations of 1799 and 1812 gave the zamindars the right to seize property of the tenants in case of non-payment of rent without any permission of a court of law. It is no wonder, therefore, that as a cumulative effect of this support to the coercive power of the zamindars, the condition of the actual cultivators declined under the Permanent Settlement. Patta was a written agreement between the :

Which of the following is NOT a characteristic of the Permanent Settlement?