History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v3.c43.99

v3.c43.99

There is another view also according to which the king was the owner of lands and the subjects were only occupants. This latter view, being more convenient and paying, has been adopted in modern times by the British Government in its policy and legislation (e. g. *vide* section 37 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, Bombay Act V. of 1879). The Mit. on Yāj. I. 318 states²⁰³⁴ that the words of Yāj. imply that the privileges of making a gift of land or of a *nibandha* belonged only to the king and not to the governor of a province or a district under the king. The Mit. on Yāj. II. 114 quotes a smṛti²⁰³⁵ 'land passes on the happening of six circumstances viz. with the consent of one's village, of one's agnatic relations, of *sāmantas*, and of one's coparceners and when accompanied with water and (dakṣiṇā of) gold' and remarks that the consent of *sāmantas* (neighbours) is only necessary as a safeguard against disputes about boundaries and that of the villagers is necessary for giving notice of the alienation to all. As the king is not mentioned here, the king's consent does not appear to have been necessary for the gift of land by a private person. But it appears that the king's consent was sometimes sought for gifts by private persons and obtained e. g. in Gupta Ins. No. 31 p. 135 Mahārāja Śarvanātha (G. S. 214) approves of a gift of two villages made to a person and his sons and grandsons in succession for the worship of the goddess Piṣṭapurikādevī by a donee to whom they had been originally granted.