What was the nature of the rule “Janmi’s Right” at the time of Britishers

But it is doubtful whether the earliest British administrators in Malabar had in view this absolute nature of the Janmis’ rights. On 29th of June 1803, Mr. Rickards, the first judge and Principal Collector of Malabar issued in Calicut a Proclamation which was delivered to the Rajas, Nambudiris, Mookistans and principal landholders. This Proclamation has not only defined the share due to the Kudians but also fixed permanently the share of the produce to the Government and the share due to the Janmi. The apportionment of the produce as per the Proclamation is as follows:

Kudiyans: 1/2 of the gross produce

Janmi: 1/5 of the gross produce

Government: 3/10 of the gross produce

Total: 1

The several facts stated in this document succinctly show that the Janmis were prevented by the early rulers of the Company from exacting anything more than their legitimate share. They did not recognise the unlimited and absolute right of the Janmi. This Proclamation was based on the custom prevailing in Malabar from time immemorial. The later administrators overlooked this fact and placed Janmi on a par with the ‘dominus’ of Roman law.

As Logan observed, “The civil courts acting on the idea that the Janmi was a dominus and as such entitled to take what he could get out of the land, viewed his pledges as pledges of the soil itself, and in this way, they have almost completely upset the native system of customary sharing of the produce.” In his Report of 1882, as the Special Commissioner to investigate the grievances of tenants in Malabar, Logan maintained that prior to the commencement of the British rule, no private property in European sense of the term existed in Malabar.

That Janmam right did not import absolute property in the soil that the three classes connected with the land-the Janmi, the Kanakkar and the actual cultivator-had been co-proprietors entitled each to one-third share of the net produce. He was of the opinion that the Kanam tenure was practically a permanent one that actual cultivators were entitled to one-third of the net produce and that the toddy drawers carpenters, blacksmiths and other people of the humbler classes possessed with the Janmis so-ordinate interests in the soil termed “cheru Janmam”, or small birth right.

The mistake of the civil court resulted ultimately in the excessive renewal fees and social tyranny of the Janmis which resulted in agrarian discontent. Logan described the cultivating classes as rapidly degenerating into a state of insolvent cotterism.”