Hindu Law and Custom (Recht und Sitte) c8.31

c8.31

On the other hand the fields, mostly furnished with hedges, appear always to have belonged to individual proprietors (Kṣetrin, Kṣetrika, Kṣetrasvāmin), who therefore may demand compensation for injury done to their property (M. 8, 241 etc.).¹ The principle of ownership of the field also serves as the theme of comparisons and it is specially indicated when, for instance, it is said that if a seed is carried off by wind or water into another field and there generates into a tree and bears fruits, then it becomes the property only of the owner of this field (M. 9, 54; Nār. 12, 56). The fruits of such trees as grow on the boundary line between two fields should belong to the owners of both the fields (Nār. 11, 13). The tenant of a field who pays to the owner half the crops as rent, is called Ardhika, Ardhasirin (Vi. 57, 16 etc.); an idle tenant will be punished and must hand over the rented field to some other person for cultivation (Y. 2, 158).² Moreover, the organisations mentioned by Bṛh. 14, 21—26 for jointly cultivating the soil have evidently nothing to do with the original joint possession of the fields because he recommends great caution in the selection of partners and describes these agricultural associations in connection with the rules of trading companies.