Which among the following was not one of the important consequence of permanent settlement ?

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct option is 2:

The Permanent Settlement, introduced by Lord Cornwallis in 1793, fixed the land revenue demand permanently with the Zamindars (landlords). This system did not lead to an "unexpected increase in agriculture production." In fact, because the revenue demand was high and permanent, Zamindars focused on extracting maximum rent rather than investing in land improvement, which often stifled agricultural growth. The farmers (ryots) were burdened with high rents and lost their traditional rights over the land, which gave them little incentive to increase production. Therefore, a major, widespread increase in agricultural output was not a characteristic outcome of this settlement.

The incorrect option is 1:

"created a class of devoted land holders" is a consequence of the Permanent Settlement. The Zamindars, who were granted ownership rights over the land in exchange for a fixed revenue payment to the Company, became a new class of powerful, loyal intermediaries, especially in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.

The incorrect option is 3:

"made farmers completely dependent upon Landlords" is a direct consequence of the Permanent Settlement. The rights of the cultivators (ryots) were reduced to mere tenants-at-will, who were subject to the whims and demands of the Zamindars, leading to extreme dependency and exploitation.

The incorrect option is 4:

"deprived the company of incremental growth in income" is a major consequence of the Permanent Settlement. Because the revenue demand was fixed permanently, the East India Company could not claim a share of the increased revenue that resulted from the expansion of cultivation or rising prices over time, thus missing out on future income growth.