CENSUS OF

OCCASIONAL P APER-1 OF 1981

Uninhabited villages of

CENSUS DIVISION Office of the Registrar General, India Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi

CONTENTS

Pages Foreword

Introduction

Chapater I Scope and Object of the Study 2

Chapter II Procedure followed for Collecting and Shifting Data 3-5

Chapter III District 6-15

Chapter IV Chickmagalur District 16-20

Chapter V District 21-29

Chapter VI 30--38

Chapter VII District 39-52 Chapter VIII District 53-58

Chapter IX 59-67

Chapter X District 68-79

Chapter XI District 80-90

Chapter XII Consolidated picture for the Nine Districts 91-99

Chapter XIII Shifted and Merged Villages 100

Chapter XIV Never Inhabited Villages 101-105

Chapter XV Abandoned Villages 106-110

Chapter XVI Villages with Transient Population 111

Chapter XVII Conclusion 112

SERIAL ORDER OF MAPS

Map No. Title of the map

1. Number of never inhabited and abandoned villages in each district and the intensity of net work of roads

2. Number of never inhabited and abandoned villages III each district and the percentage of area under forest

3. Map showing the incidence of abandoned villages and the taluks worst affected by Plague between 1896 and 1911

4. Map showing the incidence of abandoned villages and the taluks where Malaria was endemic prior to the N.M.E. Programme

5. Map showing the incidence of abandoned villages and the taluks worst affected by the Influenza epidemic of 1918-1919

6. Map showing the incidence of abandoned villages and the taluks identified as drought affected by the irrigation commission 1972

7. Harihar village-Area merged in Harihar Town

8. Mahajenahalli-Area merged in Harihar Town

9. Devara -Area merged in Town

10. village-Area merged in Malur Town

11. Mulabagal village-Area merged in Mulabagal Town

12. Maragondana village-Area merged in Mysore City

13. village-Area merged in Gubbi Town

14. Sira Village-Area merged in Sira Town

FOREWORD

At the IASP Bangalore Conference, Prof. Ashok Mitra of lawaharlal Nehru University requested Shri K. Balasubramanyam to undertake an analysis of uninhabited villages of Karnataka from 1872 to 1971. Uptil now, no work seem) to h:we been done on what the censuses have been returning as uninhabited villages. Shri Balasubramanyam, who is a veteran in the field of census, having been Superintendent of Census Operations of the then Mysore State during the 1961 Census, readily agreed to take up this analysis. The Indian Council of Social Science Research, New Delhi came forward to support the project. Shri Balasubramanyam has, with his customary thorou­ ghness, prepared the monograph. The Registrar General's Office undertook to publish this volume and the present work is the product of a collaborative project between the Indian Council of Social Science Research, lawaharlal Nehru University and Registrar General of India. This monograph is a useful addition to the stream of Census publications and we trust breaks new ground.

P. PADMANABHA Registrar General, India New Delhi May 31,1980

I ~ \

INTRODUCTION

[his study was undertaken on the suggestion Shri P. Padmanabha. formerly Director of made by Dr. Asok Mitra, Professor, Centre for Census Operations, Karnataka and now Registrar Regional Development, Jawaharlal Nehru University. General, India made availa ble to me all the old publi­ New Delhi and Director, I.C.S.S.R. & F.F.P. Projects, cations and other material assiduously collected by during his visit to Bangalore in 1976. He was of the the Census Directorate over a period of two de~ades view that my experience in the Revenue Depart­ during which the office has been in existence without ment as well as in the Census Organisation could be any break. This facility lightened my work to a consi­ put to good use for a study of the uninhabited derable extent. villages of Karnataka. He was also good enough to interest the Indian Council of Social Science Research The Government of Karnataka Qcceded readily and the Jawaharlal Nehru University in the project to my request to instruct the Department of Land and to get financial assistance for meeting the out of Records, Survey & Settlement to furnish information pocket expenses incurred for the study. I thank him regarding land utilization in the villages covered by for having suggested this subject for study and the this study. support he has given to me throughout the period covered by the study. CHAPTER I

SCOPE AND OBJECT OF THE STUDY

After every Census, population tables arc pub­ the former princely State of Mysore. In respect of lished. The Gc';;cral Population Tables invarLtbly show these nine districts, villagewise population figures the number of inhabited villages and the number of are available for all the Ii census"s commencing from uninhabited villages. The general impression one will 1871 census and ending with the 1971 census. More­ get when one reads about uninhabited villages is of a over, these nine districts account for more than 80% village which had been populated once and which is of the uninhabited villages (2,265 out of 2,707), and now dEserted. This, however, is not true of every the pattern that emerges in respect of these nine village which is treated as uninhabited in census. districts is likely to prove interesting. Tn Karnatuku the revenue village which is the smal­ lest administrative unit for purposes of maintenance There was yet another difficulty in extending of land re,:ords has been treated as the village for the scope of the study to the remaining districts of census purposes. Some of these villages are covered Karnataka State. A large number (If uninhabited entirely by forests or other types of reserved land villages in the districts of and Dharwar whm: it i; not pos~ible to set up hllman habitations were merged with the adjoining villages between or to find support for livelihood. There are other 1950 and 1971 and if the study is based on the villages which comprise solelY the irrigated tracts and number of uninhabited villages shown in the 1971 the residential area is situated in another village in Census Tables, it would not have been fully repre­ higher areas near the irrigated tracts. There are also sentative for these districts. As explained in detail uninhabited census villages where the residential in the succeeding Chapter, I have tried to classify portion has werged in adjoining urban area and the the uninhabited villages in the districts of Bangalore, residuary P'lft treated as a separate village consists , Chitradurga, Hassan, Kolar, Mandya, only of the tninhabited porticn. There have been a Mysore (excluding Kollegal Taluk), Shimoga and few cases \o\h~re rtsidential portions have been shifted Tumkur into several categories so as to locate such consequent on the construction of irrigation and/or of the villages as had settled communities in the hyde! projects but the village continues to exist in recent past and have been ab'mdoned. It is these the records as some of the lands included in the villages wh ich deserve a further study and not the village remain unsubmergcd. It is only after elimina­ villages in respect of which there is a valid explana­ ting all these categories of villages that a correct idea tion for the absence of population-such as shifting can be got of the number of vill2ges which had been or merger of the inhabited portio:1 or a village never populated by settled communities at one time and having been available for settlement in view of the which have been abandoned. entire area being reserved by Government-is availa­ ble. The basis for determining the category to which When Dr Mitra suggested this subject, I intc:n­ a village belongs is the popUlation during the 11 ded to study all the 2,707 villag~s which. were shown censuses from 1871 to 1971 and also the existence as uninlubit:,d villages in the 1971 Census Tables in of a village site as per land records. While the exis­ Karnataka. However, in view of the difficulty experi­ tence of a village site is taken as positive evidence enced in tracing the census ligures for the villages that there was a settled community in the village at from Hyderabad Area, Bombay Area, Madras Area some time, the absence of a village site is not held and Coorg of th"! censuses prior to 1951, I decided as conclusi, e evidence of the absence of a settled to restrict the scope of the study to the villages shown community. The reasons for this are explained in as uninhabited in the 9 districts which constituted the next Chapter. CHAPTER II

PROCEDURE FOLLOWED FOR COLLECTING AND SHIFTING DATA

As explained in the previous Chapter, the main in 1971 comprising only the residuary uninhabited purpose of this study is to identify the villages portion. which had settled communities and which have been abandoned. After these villages have been Abandoned villages can be sub-divided into identified, their distribution territorially and the three groups. Sub group (I) will comprise villages number of villages abandoned during each decade which had been ab:mdoned prior to 1871 but in will be studied. which the existence of a settled community sometime prior to 1871 is indicated by the demarcation of a The vill1ges which were uninhabited in 1971 village site at the time of survey and settlement. can be classified into five different groups as These villages are assigned the symbol A.I. follows: The villages abandoned between 1871 and 1961 (1) Never Inhabited: N can again be shown under two sub categories viz., Villages which had not been inhabited any time Ca) Villages which had some popUlation at one or during the past 150 years as evidenced by their more of the ten censuses ending with 1961 Census baving returned no population throughout the and also a village site demarcated during survey and period 1871-1971 and by the absence of a settlement, the existence of such village site being village site. Though census figures are available taken as an indication that there was a settled com­ from 1871 only, it is assumed that the absence munity ; (b) Villages which are deemed to have been of a village site during Survey & Settlement established settlements having regard to the popula­ operations (commenced in 1863) would imply tion pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 that the Community even if it had existed, had census even though no village sites have been demar­ gone out of existence atleast fifty years earlier. cated during survey and settlement. While the demar­ cation of a village site can be positive evidence of the (2) Abandoned: A existence of a settled community, the absence of a Villages in respect of which there is evidence village site docs not rule out the existellce of a settled to support the existence of settled communities community. In the Malnad and especially in the taluks in the past but which were uninhabited in where area is grown (Sagar, ThirthahalIi, Hosanagar, 1971. Kappa, and ) the people generally reside within the gardens and there is no village as (3) Transient: T such in many cases. Also where new settlements are Villages where the population returned in some formed in released forest lands, Amritmahal Kavals of the censuses from 1871 to 1971 has to be etc., after the revision settlement the survey records deemed as transient having regard to the absence will not indicate the existence of village site even of a village site and the sporadic pattern of though the settlement would have been intended as an the population. established settlement when it was formed. Further, the old State of Mysore had more than 2,000 Inam (4) Shifted: S Villages. Of these survey and settlement had been Villages which have become uninhabited on introduced only in about 800 villages. In respect of account of the shifting of the population by the remaining villages numbering about 1,200 only a government action consequent on the acquisi. rough valuation survey for determining the jodi, tion of the residential area of the village either quit-rent and cesses had been conducted and there for submersion under irrigation and/or hyde} was no demarcation of the village site even in projects or on health grounds. villages where it existed.

(5) Merged: M Villages abandoned between 1871 and 1971 are Villages whose residential areas were merged in thus assigned symbols A.ltA. and A.U.B. depending the adjoining urban units, the village as existing OJ] whether the survey records show the existence of 4 a village site or not. All the villages which were those for which information is not available. Only uninhabited according to the 197 j Census wHl thus 288 villages out of 2,265 uninhabited villages in fall under one of the following seven categories: 1971 in the nine districts covered by the study had to be excluded for want of information under one or 1. S 2 M 3. N 4. A.I. 5. A. n. A. 6. A.II.B. and 7. T more heads. The classification on the basis indicated above has to be made with reference to the population The classification of the villages which had a registered between 1871 and 1971 and also the exis­ village site into A.!, and A.II.A. was easy. In respect tence or otherwise of a village site. In respect of the of villages which has some popUlation at one or more vilL'gcs which were uninhabited in 1971, a table was of the ten censuses between 1871 and 1961 but had drawn up showing the population at each of the 11 no village sites, the question whether any particular censu;es from 1871 to 1971. The work was facilitated village should be deemed to have had transient popu­ to some extent by the availability of consolidated lation Of a settled community had to be decided with tables showing villagewise population for the five reference to the pattern of population in each village. censuses from 1871 to 1911. ViJlagewise population A village which returned population durillg at least 3 tables were available for each of the remaining six censuses continuously is deemed to have had a settled censuses. There were many instances of two or more community even though there bas been no village villages having the same name being found in a taluk, site. Where the population recorded was small and some of them uninhabited and some inhabited. There sporadic with several intervening censuses during were also some instances where there were two unin­ which no population was returned, the population is habited vilJages of the same name in the same taluk deemed to be transient. and same hobli. The village in respect of which the figures were required was identified with reference to The last stage was the determination of the its location in the village map and this was adequate decade during which the vi1lag~ which had been in !Dost of the cases as the figures upto and inclusive abandoned between 1871 and 1971 could be deemed to have been abandoned. In most cases the decade of 1951 were given by hoblis. When there were two follOWing the census in which the village last returned or more villages with the same name in a hobli, the some population was taken as the decade of abandon­ particular village treated as uninhabited in 1971 was ment. But there were some cases where there has identified with reference to the total area of the been a steep decline in population during one village which is given in the Village Tables of ]951, particular decade though the total abandonment 1961 and 1971 Censuses. of the village was several decades later. Sub­ stantial abandonment and not the complete abandon­ The information furnished by the Land Records ment shc>uld be the criterion for purposes of our Department indicates whether a village had a village analysis. I have, therefore, taken tnat a village shall site or not. Even here, the existence of more than be deemed to have been abandoned during the decade one village of the same name in a taluk caused some in which its population gets reduced by more than confusion and in many cases the information 2/3 i e. if the population recorded at the commence­ furnished by the Land Records Department related ment of the decade is more than three times the to an inhabited village having the same name as an population recorded at the close of the decade, the uninhabited village. Wherever there were two or more village is deemed to have been abandoned during villages of the same name in a taluk, the information that decade. I have, however, excluded caSes where regarding the total area of the village furnished by the total depopulation or the decline of the popula­ the Land Records Department was compared with tion by more than 2/3 in a decade is reversed in the the area of the village recorded in the Village Direc­ decade immediately succeeding. This is necessary to tories of 1951,1961 and 1971 and the data given provide for cases where a village may have been accepted only when there was no great divergence evacuated due to an epidemic of plague or substan­ between the two areas. Where the total area of the tive part of the population was away at a fair or village according to the Village Directories did not festival in some other village on the date of enumera­ tally with the total area furnished by the Land tion, which was done on a single day in the earlier Records Department, the villagt: was treated as one censuses. for which information is not available. There were a few villages for which population figures of some of There are a few villages showing two abandon­ the earlier census could not be traced even with the ments, the first when the village was totally deserted best of efforts. These villages too were treated as and remained so for 30 or 40 years before it sub- 5 sequently acquired substantial population and was villages which, though uninhabited in 1971, returned again abandoned. In all such cases, I have taken the some population at one or more of the ten censuses first decade of abandonment as relevant for the pur­ commencing with the 1871 census and ending with poses of this analysis. The list of such villages having the 1961 censUS. Wherever the decade of abandon­ two abandonments is given separately. ment is different from the decade commencing with the year in wbich . the village last returned some The next nine Chapters are devoted to the population, a note is added indicating the basis on classification of uninhabited villages in each of the 9 which the decade of abandonment is arrived at. districts of the former princely State of Mysore into the seven categories. In view of the fact that the The spelling of the village names and in some classification of villages into A.II.A., A.H.B., and T cases the village names themselves vary from one as also the determination of the decade of abandon­ Census to another. Throughout tbis report I have ment are based on my personal judgment, I have adopted the names and the spellings given in the given the popUlation figures in respect of each of the 1971 Series of District Census Handbooks. CHAP'IBR III

BANGALORE DISTRICT

ANEKAL TALUK

Total number of lin inhabited villages in 1971 ... 23 A.n.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ Information not f. \ ailable ... 7 lished settlements, having regard to the population pattern during the ten cenSllses ending with 1961 Balance ... 16 census, even though there are no village sites. Of these number having vill~gc site .. 2 I. Chudenahalli 1911 (19) 1901 (97) 1891 (28) 1881 (30) 1871 N-Nenr Inhabited (79) 1901-1911 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time during the past 150 years as evidenced by their NOTE: Chudenahalli is treated as ahandoned bet­ remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- ween 1901 and 1911 when its population 1971 and by the absence of village site. declined from 97 to 19. 1. Agasa 2. Bannerghatta Kaval T - Trllnsient 3. Bidarakadahalli Villages in which the population found during one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 4. Hennagara Amanikere census is deemed to have comprised transients, having regard to the absence of village sites and the A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the population pattern. existence of village site indicating existence of an 1. Amani Bidarkere 1901 (5) established community sometime prior to 1871 even 2. Amani Doddakere 1911 (6) 1901 (13) though the village has not returned any population 3. Billachikkanahalli J90 1 (33) throughout the period 1871-1971. 4. Chikkavaderapura 1871 (32) 1. Krishnasagara 5. Giddenahalli 1931 (94) 1911 (95) 1891 (44) 1871 (56). A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or more 6. Go~tamaranahalli 1931 (19) 1901(20) of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census and 7. Hasurvani 1911 (63) 1901 (110) also having a village site indicating the existence of 8, Kurubarahatti 1911 (32) 1901 (123) an established community. 9. Muthanallur Amanikere 1901 (41) Decade of abandonment The following table shows the number of villages 1. 191 I (29) 1901 (34) ahandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades 1891 (29) 1881 (21) IS71 (23) 1911-1921 from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 IS81 1891 1901 1911 J921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 J931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1

BANGALORE NORTH TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 11 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- Of these number having village site .. , 5 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1. Shamarajapura N-Never Inhabited Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 2. Singanaikanahalli Amanikere during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 3. Amanikere 7

A,I, Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the NOTE: (a) Lingadeeranaballi is treated as abandoned existence of village site indicating existence of an between 1891 and 1901 when its population established community sometime prior to 1871 even declined from 35 to nil treating the popula­ though the village has not returned any population tion returned in 1951 as transient. tbroughout the period 1871-1971. (b) Mandala Kunte is treated as abandoned bet­ ween 1901 and 1911 when its population -NiI- declined from 46 to 5. Tbe earlier decline in population from 28 to 9 between 1871 and kIT. <\, Villages having s"me population at one or 1881 is ignored as the population picked llllre of tbe ten cenSllses ending with the 1961 up hy 1891 to 27. The population returned cenSllS and also having a viIJag~ site indicating the in 1931. 1941, 1951 and 1961 is treated as existencc of an est"b1ished community, transient. Decade of abandonment T -Transient 1. Gasthi Kempanahalli ]871 (19) 1871-1881 Villages in which the population found during one 2, Lingadecranaballi 1951 (19) or more of the ten cenSUSlS ending with the 1961 1891 (35) 1881 (32) 1871 (45) [891-1901 census is deemed to have comprised transients, [See note (a)] having regard to the absence of village sites and the 3. Manda[a Kunte 1961 (3) 1951 population pattern. (7) 1941 (1) 1931 (7) 1911 (5) 1. Krishnasagara 1931 (23) 1921 (31) 1901 (46) 1891 (27) 1881 (9) 1871 (73) 1871 (28) 1901-1911 2. Lakshmisagara 1871 (27) [See note (b)] 3. Lingarajasagara 1941 (12) 1931 (68) 1871 (27) 4. Myakala Chinnanahalli 1881 (15) 1871 (14) 1881-1891 The following table shows the number of villages 5. Shivanahalli 1961 (26) 1951 abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades (25) 1961·1971 from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 1

BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 197[ ... 10 established community sometime prior to 1871 even Of these number having village site ... I though the village bas not returned any population throughout the period 1871-1971. N-Ncver Inhabited Villages which had not been inhabited at any -Nil- time during the past 150 years as evidenced by A.TI.A. Villages having some populr.tion at one or their remammg uninhabited throughout the period 1871-1971 and by the absence of village more of the ten censuses e::Jding with the 1961 census and also having a village site indicating the exis­ site. tence of an established community. L nheemanakuppe Decade of 2. Chandrasekharapura abandonment 1. Vasanthanahalli 1891 (37) 3. Sarakkikcre 1881 (28) 1871 (39) 1891-1901 4. Sinivagilukere 5. Venkojirao Khane A,II.B. Villages wbich are deemed to have been estab. lished settlements, having regard to the population A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 existence of village site indicating existence of an census, even though there arc no village sites. 8

I. Amanikere 1951 having regard to the absence of village sites and the (23) 1941 (13) 1931 (12) 1921 population pattern. (6) 1911 (II) 1901 (20) 1891 (6) 1. Chikkanelli 1901 (4) 1891 (17) 1881 (4) 1951·1961 2. Khanekiandaya 1941 (6) 1931 (10) 3. Krishnarajapura 1831 (9) 1871 (9) T -Transient Villages in which the poulation found during one The following table shows the number of villages or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 abandoned before 1871 and durin] each of the decades census is deemed to have comprised transients, from 1871 to 1971.

Before J871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1

CHANNAPATNA TALUK 2. Attiguppe 1961(6) 1941(36) 1931(3) 1911(7) 190](15) 1891(28) 1941-1951 Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 12 [See note (b)] Information not available •.. 1 Of these number having village site ..• 2 A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been established settlements, having regard to the popula­ N-Never Inhabited tion pattern during the ten censuses ending with Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 1961 census, even though there are no village sites. during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 1. SoudhahaIIi 1901(19) 1891(27) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1881(78) 1871(39) 1901-1911 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1. Chagare Doddi. NOTE: (a) Ammallidoddi is treated as abandoned bet· 2. Chikkamannugudde State Forest. ween 1871 and 1881 when its population 3. Kadu Kothanaballi Plantation. declined from 68 to 14. The population 4. Kethara Vaderahalli. found in 1901 and 1961 is deemed transient. 5. Mudigere Plantation. (b) Attiguppe is treated as abandoned between 6. Mylanathapura. 1941 and 1951 when its population declined from 36 to nil. The depopulation between A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 1911 and 1921 is ignored as the population existence of village site indicating existence of an in 1931 was more than 11 3 the population established community sometime prior to 1871 even in 1911. The population found in 1961 is though the village has not returned any population deemed transient. throughout the period 1871·1971. T-Transient -Nil- Villages in which the population found during one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or census is deemed to have comprised transients, male of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 having regard to the absence of village sites and the census and also having a village site indicating the population pattern. existence of an established community. 1. Kadukiothanahalli 1891(3) 1871(2) Decade of 2. Naralapura 1891(7) 1871(46) abandonment 1. Ammallidoddi 1961(5) 1901(1) The following table shows the number of villages 1881(14) 1871(68) 1871·1881 abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades (See note (a)] from 1871-1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 I 1 9

DEVANAHALLY TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 38 3. Nellukunte 1891 (9 n 1881 (73) Information 110t available ... 13 1871 (99) 1891-1901 Balance ... 25 A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been Of these number having village site ... 3 established settlements, having regard to the popula­ N-Never Inhabited tion pattern during the ten censuses ending with Villages which had 110t been inhabited at any time 1961 census, even though there are no village sites. during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 1. Channa.sandra 1941(2) 1931(12) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1921 (6) 1911 (19) 1901 (2) 1931-1941 1971 and by the absence of village site. [See note (b) 1 1. Budanapadiya 2. Kommasandra 1931(22) 1921(2~) 2. Amanikere 1911 (130) 1901 (71) 1911-1921 [See note (c)] 3. Channarayapattana Amanikere 3. Upparahdli 1951 (14) 1931 (6) 4. Doddajala Amanikere 1921 (3) 1911 (5) 1951-1961 5. Guttahalli [See note (d) 1 6. Kachipura 7. Kotnathevaru NOTE-(a) Lakshmipura is treated as abandoned bet­ ween 1871 and 1881 when its population 8. Maradiane declined from 30 to nil. As the village was 9. Mulli Amanikere again populated in 1901, 19]1 and 1921 it is treated as II bandoned for the second ti:ne 10. Nallur Amarai between 1921 and 1931. 11. Sambargidada Kaval (b) Ch::nnasandra is treated as abandoned 12. Sowtegowdanaballi between 1931 and 1941 when its population declined from 12 to 2. 13. Tatamachanahalli Amanikere (c) Kommasandra is treated as abandoned bet­ A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the ween 1911 and 1921 when its population existence of vil!age site indicating existence of an declined from 130 to 24. established community sometime prior to 1871 even (d) Upparahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ though the village has not returned any population ~een 1951 and 1961 ignoring the depc,pnla­ tlOn between 1931 and 1941 as the popula­ throughout the period 1871-1971. tion in 1951 was 2(3 that in 1931.

-Nil- T -Transient A.n.A. Villages having some population at one or Villages in which the population found during one more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 cen­ or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 sus and also having a village site indicating the census is deemed to have comprised transients, having regard to the absence of village sites and the existence of an established community. Decade of population pattern. abandonment 1. AbachikkanahalJi 1951 (39) 1871 (48) 1. Lakshmipura 1921 (2) 1911 (15) 2. Bidlapura Amallikcre 1941 (13) 1921 (2) 1901 (2) 1901 (3) 1871 (30) 1871-1881 3. Hosatota 1921 (10) (Abandoned again between 1921 4. Kondenahalli 1891 (3) 5. Varajahalli 1911 (25) and lY31) 6. Amallikere 1931 (6) 1921 (7) 1901 (5) [See note (a) 1 2. Mangasandra 1941 (97) 1931 (31) The following table shows the number of Vill8"'fS 1921(57) 1911(51) 1901(50) 1891(30) abandoned before 1871 and during each uf t!1:~ decades 1881 (10) 1871 (8) 1941-1951 from 1871-1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 196 ! 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 '941 1951 1961 1971 I "--~-'--~.'----" --_._- 10

DODDABALLAPUR T AI,UK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 36 7. Madhure Amanikere 1961 (6) 1961-1971 Information not available ... 13 8 . Masthimmanahalli 1921 (5) Balance ... 23 1911 (6) ]901 (11) 1B91 (23) 1871-1881 Of these number having village site ... 10 1871 (76) [See note (d)] N-Never Inhabited Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ Villages which had not been inhabited at any time A. II. B. lished settlements, having regard to the population duri':'g the past 150 years as evidenced by their pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1371- census, even though there are no village sites. 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1. 1. Narasapura 1961 (15) 1921 2. Chikkahejjaji Amanikere (12) 1911 (8) 1901 (5) 1891 (7) 1871-1881 3. Dinnenahalli 1881 (31) 1871 (174) [See note (e) ] 4. Koolur Plantation 5. Pura NOTE: (a) Beedikere Agrahara is treated as abandoned 6. Rajaghatta Amanikere between 1961 and 1971 when its population 7. Venkateshapura declined from 11 to nil. The depopulation 8. Yaramuddenahalli between 1941 and 1951 is ignored as the popu­ lation in 1961 was more than '2/3 that in 1941. A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the (b) Byadrajakkasandra is treated as abandoned existence of village site indicating existence of an between 1871 and 188] when its population established community sometime prior to 1871 even declined from 79 to 10. though the village has not returned any population throughout the period 1871-1971. (c) Chokkanahalli is treated as abandoned between 1921 and 1931 when its population declined L Kuntanahalli from 69 to 3. The decline in population from 2. Myakalathimmanahalli 76 to 17 between 1871 and 1881 is ignored as the population in 1891 was more than the A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or population in 1871. more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census and also having a village site indicating the (d) Masthimmanahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ existence of an established community. ween 1871 and 1881 when its population Decade of declined from 76 to nil. The population retur­ abandonment ned in 1891 and subsequent years was far less 1. Beedike re Agrahara 1961 (II) than 1/3 the population in 1871. 1941 (\6) 1931 (4) 1921 (10) 1911 (26) 1961-1971 (e) Narasapura is treated as abandoned between [See note (a) 1 1871 and 1881 when its population declined 2. Byadrajakk!asandra 188 \ (10) from 174 to 31. 1871 (79) 1871-1881 T -Transient [See note (b) ] 3. Chigaranahalli 1891 (2) 1891-1901 Villages in which the population found during one 4. Chokkanahalli 1931 (3) 1921 (69) or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 1911 (68) 1901 (77) 1891 (86) census is deemed to have comprised transients, 1881 (17) 1871 (76) 1921-1931 having regard to the absence of village sites and the [See note (c) ] population pattern. 5. Joyis Agrahara 1941 (4) 1931 1. HosanagenahalJi 1871 (71) (4) 1891 (2) 1941-1951 6. Jonnasandra 1951 (9) 1941 (5) 2. Kadathippenahalli 1931 (13) 1921 (7) 1871 (19) 1931 (13) 1921 (18) 1911 (20) 3. Shivapura Amanikere 1931 (3) 1891 (13) 1901 (30) 1891 (16) 1881 (26) 1871 (27) 1951-1961 4. Basavanapura 1921 (20) 1911 (12) 1871 (13) 11

The following table shows the number of villages abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades from 1871 to 1971. Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 '961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 3 I 1 I 1 2

HOSKOTE TALUK Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 52 Decade of Information not available ... 21 abandonment Balance ... 31 1. Devaragollahalli 1941(6) 1931(11) Of these number having village site ... 4 1921 (7) 1911 (6) 1901 (4) 1891 (6) 1881 (6) 1871 (13) 1941-1951 N-Never Inhabited 2. Srinivaspura 1911 (16) 1901 (25) Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 1891 (11) 1881 (6) 1871 (13) 1911-1921 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 3. Vanamanahalli 1951 (12) 1941 (83) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1931 (74) 1921 (71) 1911 (65) 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1901 (51) 1891 (49) 1881 (48) 1. Ankonah~lli 1871 (58) 1941-195l [See note (a) ] 2. Appajipura 3. Aralamakanahalli A.U.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ 4. Chandrapura lished settlements, having regard to the population 5. Chikka Amanikere pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 6. Doddaharadi Plantation census, even though there are no village sites. 7. Goravehalli 1. Dasarathimmanahalli 1931 (I5) 1921 (22) 1911 (16) 1901 (15) 8. Haniyur 1891 (15) 1881 (14) 1871 (25) 1931-1941 9. Hosahardi 2. Gullakayipura 1911 (29) 1901 10. Isthur Amanikere (45) 1891 (13) 1881 (6) 1871 11. IyamanahaIli (46) 1911-1921 3. Venkateshapura 1941 (9) 1931 (33) 12. Kodipura 1921 (23) 1911 (17) 1901 (14) 13. Mattabaralu 1891 (12) 1881 (8) 1871 (23) 1941-1951 14. Pulamanchi 4. 1951 (10) 1941 (4) 15. Shanthanapura 1921 (20) 1911 (7) 1901 (5) 1921-1931 [See note (b) 1 16. Thimmapura 17. Veerapura NOTE: (a) Vanamanahalli is treated as abandoned 18. Y elachanaikana pura between 1941 and 1951 when its population declined from 83 to 12. A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the (b) Varadapura is tn:ated as abandoned between existence of village sile indicating existence of an 1921 and 1931 when its population declined established community sometime prior to 1871 even from 20 to nil. The popUlation found in though the village has not returned any population 1941 and 1951 is deemed as transient. throughout the period 1871-1971. 1. Venkatapura T-Transient Villages in which the population found during one A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 more of the ten censusei> ending with the 1961 census is deemed to have comprised transients census and also having a village site indicating the having regard to the absence of village ~ites and th~ existence of an established community. population pattern. 12

1. Guddadachinnenahalli 1961 (130) 5. Vaderaha11i 1951 (31) 2. Hl1!lur Amanikere 1961 (7) 1951 (11) 1901 (17) The following table shows the number of villages 3 Marago):danahalli 1931 (6) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 4. Sonnakempanahalli 1871 (32) decades from 1871 to 1971.

Bef~~;--' 1871 1881 1891 1901 19 J.l 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 187] 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 3 -_ .------

KANAKAPORA TALUK Total number of uninhabited vilh.ges in 1971 ... 23 A.II.A. Vi11ag::s having some popUlation at one or Informatioll not available ... 1 more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 Balance ... 22 census and also having a village site indicating the existence of an established community. Of these nlimber having village site ... 1 Decade of abandonment N-Never Inhabited 1. Marasandra 1921 (2) 1921-1931 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time A.n.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ during the past 150 years as evidenced by their re­ lished settlements, having regard to the popUlation IUaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- pattern during the ten censuse~ ending with 1961 1971 and by the a bsence of village site. census, even though there are no village sites. 1. Bananthamari State Forest 1. Bannane 1961 (6) 1951 (II) 1941 (8) 1961-1971 2. Basavapatna Veersandra 2. Bilkal Forest 1961 (1) 1951 3. Chulkanakere Kaval (217) 1941 (188) 1931 (105) 1951-1961 [See note (a) ] 4. Dcshohalli 3. Naripura 1951 (34) 1941 (42) .5. Kabb"l Forest 1931 (49) 1921 (4) 1911 (12) 1951-1961 6. Kamikatte 7. Manj'1nath NOTE: (a) Bilkal State Forest is treated as abandoned 8. Moodlaswamiguppe between 1951 and 1961 when its popUlation declined from 217 to L 9. Puradadoddi 10. Rampurgattalkere Kawl T-Transient Il. Rampura Karuvinahalli Kaval Villages in which the population foand during one 12. Tailur Forest or more of the tcn censuses ending with the 1961 census is deemed to have comprised transients, 13. YadugowdaYJahalli having regard to the absence of village sites and the 14. Yalacbah"lli. population pattern. 1. Medanahalli 1891 (8) A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 2. Muggur Forest 1951 (13) 1901 (1) existence of village site indicating existence of an established community sometime prior to 1871 even 3. Ragihalli State Forest 1961 (387) though the village has not returned any population 4. 1911 (14) thrOllghout the period 1871-1971. The following table shows the number of villages abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades -Nil- from 1871 to 1971.

13~f~~----' 187] 1881 1891 1901 1911 192] 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 2 13

MAGADI TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 29 5. Shankughatta Kaval 1931 (1) Information not available ... 4 1911 (16) 1901 (3) 1911-1921 Balance ... 25 [See note (c)] Villages which come under the category of 6. Somakkanamatta 1911 (14) 1901 (1) S having been submerged by the construction 1891 (3) 1871 (24) 1871-1881 of the Thippagondauahally Reservoir .,. 2 7. Thubarapalya 1871 (40) 1871-1881 (1. Kutlu 2. Thavakadahalu) 8. Ya1achaguppe Rampura 1901 (11) Balance ... 23 1891 (12) 1881 (4) 1901-1911 Of these number having village site ... Il A.n.B. Villages which are deemed to 11ave been estab­ N-Never Inhabited lished settlements, having regard to the popnlation Village~ wLich had not been inhabited at any time pattern during the ten census ending with 1961 during the pst 150 years as evidenced by their census, even though there are no village sites. remaining uninh:lbited throughout the period 1871- L Chikkellur Rampura 1951 (54) 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1941 (109) 1931 (75) 1951-1961 1. Karigiripura 2. Papssastrypalya 1931 (18) 1921 (25) 2. Ketohalli Narasimhapul'a 1911 (3) 1901 (43) 1931-1941 3. Nasarumanillakatte 3. Rangacharipalya 1951 (19) 1941 (78) 1931 (5) 1921 (13) 1911 (10) 4. Siddedevarabetta S.P. 1901 (15) 1951-1961 5. T. Channapura NOTE: (a) Nanjundapura is treated as abandon­ A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the ed between 1931 and 1941 when its popula­ existence of village site indicating existence of an tion declined from 12 to nil. The population established community sometime prior to 1871 even found in 1961 is deemed transient. though the village has not returned any population (b) Mallenahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ throughout the period 1871-1971. ween 1931 and 1941 when its population 1. Honge Kaval 2. Sulvar Rampura declined from 40 to 11. (c) Shankighatta Kaval is treated as abandoned A.II.A. Villages huving some population at one or more between 1911 and 1921 when its population of the ten cenSllses ending with the 1961 census and declined from 16 to nil. The population also having village site indicating existence of an found in 1931 is deemed transient. established community. Decade of T -Transient abandonment Villages in which the population found during one 1. 1901(3) 1871(50) 1871-1881 or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 2. Kolur Nanjandapura 1961 (30) census is deemed to have comprised transients, 1931 (12) 1921 (9) 1911 (11) having regard to the absence of village sites and 1901 (8) 1891 (25) 1881 (31) 1931-1941 the population pattern. [See note (a)] 1. Channapura 1891 (12) 1881 (32) 3. Lingenahalli 1941 (50) 1931 (43) 2. Mallikarjunapura 1911 (13) 1871 (34) 1921 (43) 1911 (2) 1901 (40) 3. Savandurga 1871 (48) 1891 (23) 1881 (58) 1871 (42) 1941-1951 4. SettarahalIi 1941 (47) 1931 (51) 1871 (26) 4. MaJlenahalli 1961 (17) 1941 (11) 5. YelagadahaIli !931 (16) 188! (3) 1931 (40) 1921 (37) 1911 (68) 1901 (59) 1891 (62) 1881 (48) The following table shows the number of villages 1871 (147) 1931-1941 abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades [See note (b)] from 1871 to 1971. -_------Before 1871 188l 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 188J 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 3 3 2 14

NELAMANGALA TALUK Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 19 A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been Of these number for which information is established settlements. having regard to the popu­ not available ... 7 lation pattern during the ten censuses ending with Balance .•• 12 1961 census, even though there are no village sites. Of these number having villages sites ... 4 1. Gavipalya 1941 (5) 1931 (48) N-Never In:Jabited 1921 (46) 1911 (62) 1901 (54) Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 1891 (55) 1881 (44) 1871 (85) 1931-1941 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their [See note (c)] remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871-1971 and by the absence of village site. NOTE-(a) Gattisiddanahalli is taken as abandoned between 1881 and 1891 when its population 1. Mariyanapalya declined from 25 to 2. 2. Narayanappanapalya (b) Koneripura is taken as abandoned between A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 1871 and 1881 when its population decli­ existence of village site indicating existence of an ned from 23 to nil. The population of 9 established community sometime prior to 1871 even retun:ed in 1921 is deemed transient. though the village has not returned any popula­ (c) Gavipalya is taken as abandoned between tion throughout the period 1871-1971. 1931 and 1941 when its population de­ clined from 48 to 5. -NiI- T-Transient A II.A. Villages having some population at one or Villages in which the population found during one more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census and also having a village site indicating census is deemed to have comprised transients, the existence of an established community. having regard to the absence of village sites and Decade of the population pattern. abandonment 1. Balaguruvanapalya 1871 (28) 1. Ahobalapalya 1911(14) 1901(9) 2. Halurampura 1911 (15) 1891 (13) 1881 (19) 1871 (24) 19 I 1-1921 3. Krishnarajapura 1911 (9) 1871 (22) 2. GattisiddllnahaIli 1891 (2) 4. Narasipalya 1921 (23) 1881 (25) 1871 (47) 1881-1891 5. Seshagiriraopalya 1871 (33) [See note (a)J 3. Koneripura 192 I (9) 1871 (23) 1871-1881 The following table shows the number of villages [See note (b)] abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades from 1871 to 1971. 4. Ramanahalli 1871 (I 4) 1871-1881 1921 1931 1941 Before 187 I 1881 1891 1901 1911 1951 1961 1931 1941 1951 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1961 1971 2 1 I I

RAMANAGARAM TALUK Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 5 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- Information not availa hIe ... 1 1971 and by the absence of village site. Kutarbhavi Of these number having village site Nil 1. 2. TenginkaUu State Forest N-Never Inbabited Villages which had not been inhabited at any time T-Transient during the past 150 years as evidenced by their Villages in which the population found during one 15 or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 1. Belaguli (Handigundi Forest) 1911 (150) 1881 census is deemed to have comprised transients, (30) 1871 (44) baving regard to the absence of village sites and 2. Kumbalagodu State Forest 1961 (27) tbe population pattern. CHAPTER IV

CHlKMAGALUR DISTRICT

CHIKMAGALUR TALUK Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 , .. 15 A II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ Of these number having village site ... 5 lished settlements, having regard to the population pattern during the ten ct!llsuses ending with 1961 N-Never Inhabited census, even though there are no village sites. Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 1, Melugiri 1961 (66) 1951 (lSI) during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 1941 (113) 1931 (42) 1921 (38) 1911 (17) 1901 (50) 1891 (66) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 188] (153) 1871 (15) 1961-1971 1871-1971 and by the absence of village site. 2. Karuth~11u 1891 (18) 1881 (41) 1. Chindenahalli 1871 (95) 1891·1901 2. Churchugudde Kaval NOTE: (a) Arekallahalli is taken as abandoned bet­ 3. Subramanyadahalli ween 1901 and 191 I when its populat1on declined from 88 to 11. A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the (b) Hanchihalli is taken as abanr:oned between existence of village site indicating existence of an 1881 and 1891 when its population declined established community sometime prior to 1871 from 104 to nil. TJwugh the vil1:t~e became even though the village has not returned any populated again oaly by 1911, its popula­ population throughout the period 1871-1971. tion then was less than 1/3 of the popula­ -Nil- tion in 1881 and did not continue for three A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or successive censuses to treat the village as more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 abandoned twice. census and also having a village site indic'l.ting the (c) lakkeri Kav81 is treated as abandoned existence of an established community. between 1911 and 1921 when its population Decade of declined from 65 to 5. abandonment (d) is treated as abandoned between 1. Arekallahalli 1911 (11) 1901 (88) 1911 and 1921 when its population declined 1891 (38) 1901-1911 from 60 to 9. [See note (a») T -Transient 2. Hanchihalli 1941 (2) 1921 (30) Villages in which the population foand during one 1911 (27) 1881 (104) or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 1871 (135) 1881-1891 census is deemed to have comprised transients, [See note (b)] having regard to the absc:nce of village sites and 3. Jakkeri Kaval 1931 (4) 1921 (5) the population pattern. 1911 (65) 1901 (2) 1911·1921 1. HosahaIIi 1921 (6) 19J I (35) [See note (c)] 2. Kalenahalli 1921 (165) 4. Kenkere 1921 (9) 191 I (60) 3. Suragondanahalli 1921 (154) 1901 (12) 1831 (24) 1871 (59) 1901 (35) 1891 (96) 1881 (57) 4. Yerehalli 1951 (33) 1911 (45) 1871 (139) 1911-1921 5. Kamenahalli Kaval 1911 (19) [See note (d)] 5. Mallammanahalli 1921 (19) The following table shows the number of villages 1911 (55) 1901 (54) 1891 (99) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades 1881 (57) 1871 (79) 1921.1931 from 1871 to 1971. --_ .. _------_------Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 2 1 ))7

KADUR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 65 7. Hiriyangala 1931 (20) 1911 Information not available. . .. 12 (13) 1901 (19) 1891 (59) 1881 Balance ... 53 (104) 1&71 (201) 1891-1901 Of these number having village site ... 25 [See note (b)] 8. Kandagadahalli 1941 (37) 1931 N-Nevcl" Inhllhi~ed (53) 1921 (38) 1911 (65) 1901 Villages which had not b~en inllabited at any time (68) 1881 (182) 1871 (234) 1941-1951 during the pJst 150 y~ars as evidenced by their [See note (e)l remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 9. K. Thimmapura 1901 (1) 1881 1971 and by the abse01ce of village site. (5) ISS1-lI!91 1. Angajanahall [See note (d)] 2. Bagayat 10. Lylapura 1921 (27) 1901 (16) 3. Bannihatti 1891 (47) 1881 (55) 1871 (31) 1921-1931 4. Hillapura [S~e note (e)] 5. Jammapura 11. Narasipura 1921 (138) 1871 6. Kambcnahalli 7. Karithimmanahalli (13) 1871-1881 8. Lakkascttyhalli [See note (01 9. M. Mal1enahalli 12. Outhanahalli 1931 (2) 1931-1941 10. 13. Ramanahalli 1871 (27) 1871-1881 11. Revannahalli 14. Shakunipura 1911 (4) 1901 (14) 1881 (44) 187! (106) 188]-1891 A. I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as cvidcnc:d by the [See note (g)] existence of village site indicating existence of an 15. Siddegowdanahalii 1921 (16) established community some time prior to 187] even 1891 (6) 1881 (6) 1871 (16) 1891-1901 though the vilbge has not returned any population [See note (h)] throughout the period 1871-1971. 16. Somanahalli 1871 (29) 1871-1881 1. Aladahalli 17. U. Kodihalli 1881 (21) 1871 2. Kariyanahalli (73) 1871-1881 3. Mallappanahalli [See note (i)] 4. Mercdevarahalli 18. Ullinagar 1931 (35) 1911 (8) 5. SiddMahalli 1901 (2) 1891 (15) 1881 (49) 6. Siriyappanahalli 1871 (120) 1881-1891 [See note (j) ] A. II A. Villages having some populntion at one or 19. Virupanahalli 1871 (37) 1871-1881 more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 cen­ SU5 and also baving a village site indicating the NCJTE : (a) Chikka Bukkasagara is treated as abandoned existence of an established community. between 1931 and 1911 when its populati,m Decade of declined from 71 to nil. The decline in abandonment population from 129 in 1871 to 26 in ] 881 1. Bartikere 1941 (74) 1931 (76) is ignored 35 the populiltion in 1891 was 1921 (93) 1911 {]35) 1901 (144) more than half that in 1871. 1891 (141) 1881 (112) 1871 (142) 1941-1951 (b) Hiriyangala is taken as abandoned between 2. Boothanahalli 1901 (97) 1891 (109) 1881 (29) 1871 (42) 1901-1911 1891-1901 when it9 population declined from 59 to 19. 3. Chandrapura 1%1 (34) 1891 (41) 1881 (41) 1871 (55). 1901·1911 (c) Kandagadahalli is taken as abandoned bet­ 4. Chikk

declined from 5 to nil treating the subselJ.uent 3. Kachapura 1941 (22) 1931 population of 1 in 1901 as transient. (99) 1921 (99) 1911 (120) (e) Lylapura is treated as abandoned between 1901 (277) 1891 (280) 1881 1921 and 1931 ignoring the depopulation (194) 1871 (337) 1931-1941 between 1901 and 1911 as the population in [See note (b)] 1921 exceeded the population of 1901. 4. Nagadevanahalli 1941 (71) 1931 (6S) 1921 (104) 1911 (f) Narasipura is treated as abandoned between (Ill) 1901 (165) 1891 (155) 1871 and 1~81 when its population declined 1881 (161) 1871 (210) 1941-1)51 from 13 to 0 treating the population of 138 5 Ganganahalli 1911 (3) 1901 (2) in 1921 as transient. 1891 (9) 1881 (6) 1911-1921 (g) Shakunipura is treated as abandoned bet­ 6. Hirenallur Kaval 1921 (3) ween 1881 and 1891 when its population 1911 (IS) 1901 (4) 1921-1931 declined from 44 to nil as the subsequent population did not exceed 1f3 of the popUla­ NOTE: (a) Gollarahalli is treated as abandoned between tion in 1881. 1931 and 1941 when its population declined (h) Siddegowdanaha1Ii is treated as abandoned from 95 to 13. between 1891 and 1901 when the population (b) Kachapura is treated as ab3.ndoned between declined from 6 to nil, the populatio:1 of 6 1931 and 1941 when its population declined found in 1921 being treated as transient. from 99 to 22. (i) U.Kodihalli is treated as abandoned between 1871 and 1881 when its population declined T - Transient from 73 to 21. Villages in which the popUlation found during one (j) Ullinagar is treated as abandoned between or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 1881 and 1891 when it. population declined census is deemed to have comprised transients, from 49 to 15, the subsequent popUlation having regard to the absence of viJIage sites and the being treated as transient. population pattern. 1. Bilvala Kava! 1901 (9) A.II.B Villages which are deemed to have been 2. Bukkanagundi 1961 (21) 1871 (56) established settlements, having regard to the popula­ 3. Chokkapura 1871 (59) tion pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 4. Kaval 1931 (6) 1901 (4) census, even though there are no village sites. 5. Halikere Kaval 1891 (3) 1. Bokkamallanahalli 1941 (2 J) 6. Iganahally IS7 J (65) J 931 (33) 1921 (34) 1911 (55) 7. Keremelinahalli 1961 (15) 1871 (13) 1901 (36) 1891 (78) 1881 (26) 8. Taggihalli Kaval 1931 (8) 1871 (42) 1941-1951 9. Tammihalli 1921 (26) 1891 (6) 1881 (5) 10. Thubinakere 1891 (17) 2. Gollarahalli 1941 (13) 1931 11. Karehalli Kaval1911 (7) 1891 (7) 1871 (27) (95) 1921 (120) 1911 (144) 1901 (91) 1891 (61) 1881 (32) The following table shows the number of villages 1871 (64) 1931-1941 abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades [See note (a)] from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 6 5 4 2 3 I 2 4 4

KOPPA TALUK

There were no uninhabited villages in this taluk in 1971. 19

MUDIGERE TALUK

There is only one village Barimale ESlate which was have separately demarcated village sites. As the village not inhabited in 1971. The figures for the earlier censuses had not had any significant population continuously are 1961 (70), 1901 (4) and 1891 (10). In the Malnad for three or more censuses the population is treated as area in which this village is situated it is not usual to transient and the village is classified as 'T'.

NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK

The only uninhabited village in 1971 in this tiiluk was submerged by the construction of Bhadra is Golikoppa and comes under the category'S' as it Reservoir.

SRINGER[ TALUK

There were two uninhabited villages in this taluk. Karki Estate 1901 (32) comes under the category The Land Records Department has not furnished any of'T' i.e. the village which bad a transient population. information regarding the extent of village site or Mathuvalu Estate 1911 (2), 1901 (49), 1891 (162), otherwise in these two villages. However, as both 1881 (52) is shown under the category A.H.B. the these villages are in the Malnad area where village period of abandonmt:nt being treated as 1901-1911 sites are not commonly found, both of them are treated when its population declined from 49 to 2. as coming under the category of villages having no The following table shows the number of villages village site and where the population was either transi­ abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades ent or a settled community and latcr abandoned. from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 I

TAIUKERE TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 .. .42 A.1. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by tbe Information not available ... 4 existence of village site indicating existence of an established community sometime prior to 1871 even ... 38 Balance though the village has not returned any popUlation Of these num ber having vilhge site ... 16 throughout the period 1871·1971. 1. Boodaguppe N-Never Inhabited Villages which had not been inhabited at any time A.II.A. Villages having some popUlation at one or during the past 150 years as evidenced by their more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 cen­ remaining uninhabited througllout the period sus and also having village site indicating the 1871-1971 and by the absence of village site. existence of an established community. 1. Annekaval Decade of 2. Baggavalli Kav;,1 abandonment 1. A. Rangapura 1931 (78) 1921 3. Bramnah'llli (')4) 1931-194 ] 4. Goddamalienahalli 2. Dyampura 1931 (58) 1921 (75) 5. Goddada Basavanahalli 1911 (49) 1901 (31) 1891 (76) 6. MuddenahaUi 1871 (34) 191 1-1921 7. MuddenabaUi Kaval 3. GolIarahaIli 1911 (64) 1901 8. Santhedibbada Kaval (123) 1891 (101) ]881 (96) 9. Shivane Kaval 187 I (94) 19] 1-1921 20

4. Kedigehalti 1941 (98) 1931 (d) Veerapura is treated as abandoned betwee~ (98) 1921 (81) 1911 (117) 1901 1871 and 1881 when its popuLtion decli­ (121) 1891 (101) 1881 (95) ned from 201 to 6 as the decline continued 1871 (90) 1941-1951 further. 5. Kodihalli 190 I (39) 1891 (70) 1881 (94) 1871 (57) 1901-1911 A.I.I.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab· 6. Koppadaballi 1901 (205) 1891 lished settlements, having regard to the populatIon (193) 1881 (192) 1871 (243) 1901-1911 pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 7. Lakshmisagara l89l (36) 1881 cenSUF, even though there are no village sites. (50) 1871 (30) 1891-1901 1. Beli Basavanahalli 1901 (55) 8. Marekallahalli 1891 (3) 187l 1891 (37) 1881 (27) 1901-1911 (44) 1871-1881 2. Gundasamudra 1921 (24) 1911 9. Mundanahalli 1951 (34) 1911 (148) 1901 (167) 1891 (158) (2G2) 1901 (266) 1891 (105) 1881 (111) 1871 (176) 1911·1921 1881 (93) 1871 (l08) 1911-1921 [See note (a)] [See note (a)] 3. V. Chattanahalli 1911 (401) 10. Obalapura 1941 (5) 1931 (5) 1901 (401) 1891 (277) 1881 1921 (35) 1911 (40) 1901 (96) (214) 1871 (331) 1911-1921 1891 (142) 1881 (218) 1871 4. Muddenahalli 1921 (51) 1911 (167) 1921-1931 (46) 1901 (19) 1891 (27) 1871 (See note (b n (62) 1921-1931 11. Rampura 1941 (35) 1931 (35) NOTE: (a) Gundasamudra is treated as abandoned 1921 (30) 1911 (31) 1901 (51) between 1911·1921 when its population 1891 (48) 1881 (43) 1871 (41) 1941-1951 declined from 148 to 24. 12. Shivagange 1941 (85) 1931 (85) (b) MuddenahaUi is treated as abandoned bet· 1921 (86) 1911 (77) 1901 (99) ween 1921 & 1931 ignoring the decline in 1891 (148) 1881 (90) 1871 population from 62 to nil between 1871 (118) and 1881 as the population in 1891 was 13. Sidukanahalli 1891 (87) 1881 more than 1/3 the population in 1871. (47) 1871 (288) 1891-1901 [See note (c)] T-Transient 14. SirehalIi 1921 (51) 1911 (63) Villages in which the population found during one 1901 (116) 1891 (115) 1881 or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 (202) 1871 (196) 1921·1931 census is deemed to have comprised transients, 15. Veerapura 1891 (4) 181'1 (6) having regard to the absence of village sites and 1871 (201) 1871·1881 the population pattern [See note (d)] 1. Bramanahalli 1891 (3) 2. Indavara 1921 (97), 1881 (40) NOTE: (a) Mundanahalli is taken as abandoned bet· 3. Jannapura 1871 (6) ween 1911 and 1921 when its population rlee· 4. Kundur Kava1 1941 (22) lined from 202 to Nil, the population of 34 5. LakkavaHi Mannajangal 1941 (170) 1931 (170) returned in 1951 being treated as transient. 1901 (30) 1891 (42) 1871 (75) (b) Obalapura is deemed as abandoned between 6. Rangapura Kaval ]911 (37) 1921 and 1931 when its population declined 7. Rallgenahalli 1911 (17) from 35 to 5. 8. SiddarahaUi 1931 (54) (c) Sidukanahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ 9. Kallahalur 1871 (21) ween 1871 and 1881 when its population declined from 288 to 47 as it did not exceed The fo1l0wiog table shows the number of villages 1/3 of the population of 1871 at any time abandoned before 1871 anll during each of the deca­ subsequently. des from 1871 to 1971.

Befcre 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 190L 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 __1~ __----~2~-- ______~2~ ____~3~ ____~5 ______3 ______1__ __ 3 ___,__ _ CHAPTER V

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT

CHALLAKERE 1'ALUK Number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 29 A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ Qfthese number ha\ing village site ... 5 lished settlements, having regard to the population pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 N-Never Inhabited census, even though there are no village sites. Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 1. Lakamagondanahalli 1911 (6) during the past 150 years as evidenced by their re­ 1901 (36) 1891 (34) 1881 (26) maining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1871 (32) 1901-1911 1971 and by the absence of village site. [See note (c)] 1. Badavanahalli Kaval 2. Doneballi Kaval NOTE: (a) Channammanagathihalli KavaI is treated as 3. Henjamuthenahalli abandoned before 1871 treating the popula­ 4. Konigarahalli Kav31 tion of 1 in 1901 and 5 in 1961 as transient. 5. Lingavvanahalli (b) Kannenahalli is deemed to have been aban­ 6. Mallavvanahalli doned between 1911-1921 when its popula­ 7. Modur Kaval tion declined from 96 to O. 8. Mummadisagara (c) Lakamagondanahalli is taken as abandoned 9. Obalapura Kaval between 1901 and 1911 When its population 10. Obammanahalli Kaval declined from 36 to 6. 11. Pagadalabande Kaval T - Transient A I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the exis­ Villages in which the population found during one tence of village site indicating existence of an or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 established community sometime prior to 1871 census is deemed to have comprised transients even though the village has not returned any popu­ having regard to the absence of village sites and th~ lation throughout the period 1871-1971. population pattern. 1. Bharma SClgara I. Belagere Kaval 1931 (6) 1901 (II) 1891 (22) 1881 (13) A ItA. VIllages having some population at one or 2. Bheemanakere 1911 (3) more of ten censuses ending with the 1961 census 3. Chowlur Kaval 1961 (382) lind also having a village site indicating the exi­ 4. Giddanahalli 1931 (7) 1921 (20) stence of an established community. 5. Giddapura 1931 (8) 1921 (4) 1901 (6) Decade of 6. Kamllisagara 1961 (12) 1911 (8) abandonment 7. Paranurampura Kaval 1911 (4) 1901 (17) 1891 1. Badavanahalli 1911(9) 1911-1921 (12) 1881 (4) 8. putIorahaIli Kaval 1902 (2) 2. Channammanagathihalli 9. Bekkulagere Kaval1931 (251) 1921 (45) Kaval 1961 (5) 1901 (1) Before 1871 [See note (a)] 10. Sanikere Kaval1911 (II) 1901 (5) II. Varavoo Kaval1901 (3) 1881 (15) 3. Jangamarahalli 1871 (16) 1871·1881 12. Viswanathapura 1941 (17) 4. K2nnenahalli 1961 (10) 1911 (96) 1901 (86)1891(128) 1881 The following table shows the number of villages (88) 1871 (148) 1911-1921 abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decade [See note (b)l from IS71 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 1 2 22

CHITRADURGA TALUK Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 26 6. Kencahvvanagathihalli 1871 Information not available ... 3 (I 12) 1871-1881 1871·1881 Balance ... 23 7. Rampura 1871 (51) Of these number having village site .. , 9 8 . Vyasamallapura 1901 (44) 1901·1911 A. II.B. Villages whicb are deemed to have been N-Never Inllabited Villages which had nol been inhabited at any time established settkments, having regard to the popu­ during the past 150 years as evidenced by their lation pattern during the ten censuses ending witb remaining uninhabi ted througbout the period 1871- 1961 census, even though tbere are no village 1971 and by the absence (Jf village site. sites. 1. Dindadahalli 1. Athikatte 1911 (35) 1901 (31) 2. Jampannanahalli 1891 (42) 1871 (2) 1911-1921 3. Herakenahalli 2. Doddapura 1961 (8]) 1941 4. Kenchamaranahalli (14) 1891 (l2) 1871 (10) 1961-1971 5. LingdadahaJli 3. Konammahalli 1951 (438) 1951-1961 6. MartjogihaJli 4. Raghalobanahalli 1921 (81) 7. Nerlegondi 19l I (9) 190J (9) 1881 (5) 8. Veeravvanagathihalli 1871 (100 1871-1881 [See note (ell A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 5. Vceramedakeripura 1871 (41) 1901-1911 existence of village site indicating existence of an established community sometime prior to 1871 even NOTE: (a) Arasuru is taken as abandoned between though the village has not returned any population 1871 and 1881 when its population declined throughout the period 1871-1971. from 162 to nil. The popUlation returned 1. Kariyammanahalli in 1891 is less than one third the population in 1871. A.I1.A. Villages having some population at one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 (b) Jattlahalli is taken as abandoned between cenSUS and also having a village site indicating the 1931 and 194 I. The decline of the popula­ tion from 1871 and 1881 from 109 to 11 is existence of an established community. Decade of ignored as the population increased to 81 in abandonment 1391 and remaineJ steady till 1931. 1. ArasUiU 1891 (38) 1881 (Nil) (c) RagbalobanahaJli is taken as abandoned bet­ 1871 (162) 1871-1881 ween 1871 and 1881 when its popUlation [See note (a)J declined from 106 to 5. The subsequent 2. BettadanagenahaJJi 1951 (308) population of 9 in 1901,9 in 1911 and 81 in 1941 (219) 1931 (215) 1921 1921 is taken as transient. (l90) 1911 (163) 1901 (155) 1891 (50) 1881 (81) 1871 T-Transient (l05) 1951-1961 Villages in which the population found during one 3, Guruppanhalli 1911 (33) 1901 or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 (57) 1891 (13) 1911-1921 census is deemed to have comprised transients 4. JagadaJipura 1931 (88) 1921 having regard to the absence of village sites and (47) 1901 (10) 1891 (6) 1871 the population pattern. (85) 1871-1881 I. Hullgere 1921 (59) 5. Jattlahalli 1931 (54) 1921 (95) 1911 (99) 1901 (84) 1891 The following table shows the number of villages (81) 1881 (11) 1871 (109) 193H9~1 abandoned before 1871 and during each oftbe decades [See note (b)] from 1871 to 1971. 1921 1931 1941 Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1951 1961 1941 1951 1871 1881 1191 1901 1911 1921 1931 1961 1971 1 5 2 2 2 1 23

DAVANAGER~ TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 20 2. *NeelavvanahaIli 1941 (I 2) Information not available ... 4 1931 (65) 1921 (24), 191 J (24) Balance ... 16 1911 (26) 1901 (9) 1871 (LOS) 1871-1881 (Second abandonment between Of these number having village site ... 3 1931-1941) N - Never Inhabitrd A.n.B. Villages which arc deemed to have been estab· Villages which had not been inhabited at any time lished settlements, having regard to the population during the past J 50 years as evidenced by their pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 remaining uninhabited throughout the period J871- census, even though there are no village sites. 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1. Timlapura 1891 (35) 1881 (44) 1. Akkasaule Dyamajjiballi. 1871 (42) 1891-1901 2. Basavanahatty. 3. Giriyavvanahalli. NOTE: *Neelavvanahalli is taken to be abandoned 4. Lakkavvanahalli. between 1871 and 1881 when its popUlation dec­ 5. Panjenahalli. lined from 105 to nil. T - Transient A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the Villages in which the population found during one existence of village site indicating existence of an or more of the ten censuses ending with (he 1961 established community sometime prior to J 87] even census is deemed to have comprised transients, though the village has not returned any population having regard to the absence of village sites and the throughout the period 1871-1971. population pattern. 1. Vaderahalli. 1. Chikkamagadi 1941 (4), 1931 (26) 2. Donkenahalli 191 1(271 1871 (34) A.II.A. Villages having some popUlation at one or 3. Hanumanahalli 1871 (14) more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 4. Habbalgiriyapura 1921 (3) census and also having a village site indicating the 5. Pitnahalli 1881 (2) existence of an established community. 6. RangavvanahaIli 1941 (196) 1931 (139) 1871 Decade of (19) abandonment 7. Turuvanahal 1911 (7) 190 I (3) 1. Gujjikonda 1941 (69) 1931 (80) 1921 (68) 1911 (48) 1901 The foHowing table shows the number of villages (Ill) 1891 (20) 1881 (1 J) 1871 abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades (42) 1941-1951 from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 1

HARIHAR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 10 during the past ISO years as evidenced by their Merged in the adjoining urban area ... 2 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- (1. Harihar Rural 2. Mahajenahalli) 197 I and by the absence of village site. Balance 8 Of these number having village site 2 I. Bakkapura 2. Bhyranahalli N - Never Inhabited Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 3. Serapura 24

A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or (b) Rayapura is taken as abandoned between more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census 1891 and 1901. The decline from 21 to Nil and also having a village site indicating tbe existence between 1871 and 1881 is ignored as the of an established community. original level by 1891. The population of 7 in 1911 is treated as transient Decade of abandonment T - Transient 1. Baggadanabalu 1951 (39) 1901 Villages in which the population found during one (26) 1891 (46) 1881 (75) 1901-1911 or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census is deemed to have cornprised transients, (See note (an having regard to the absence of village sites and the 2. Rayapura 1911 (7) 1891 (27) population pattern. 1891-1901 1871 (21) 1. Chikbthammanahalli 1901 (1) [See note (b)] 2. Mudlabasapura 1901 (6) NOTE: (a) Baggadanahalu is taken as abandoned bet­ 3. Vaderahalli 1871 (28) ween 1901 and 1911 when its population declined from 26 to Nil. The subsequent The following table shows the number of villages population of 39 in 1951 is treated as tran­ abandoned before 187 J and during each of the sient. decades from 1871 to 1971.

1931 1941 1951 1961 Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1951 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1961 1971 1

HIRIYUR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 11 census and also having a village site indicating the Information not available ... 1 existence of an established community. Balance ... 10 Of these number having village site ... Nil Nil A n.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ N-Never Inhabited lished Sl ttlements, having regard to the population Villages which had not been inhabit~d at any time pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their census, even though there are no village sites. remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1971 and by the absence of village site. Nil 1. Amanithalavu 2. Kattehole T-Tr.llnsient 3. K urudagerenahalli Villages in which the population found during one 4. Thimmalapura or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 5. Haladyamavvanahalli census is deemed to have comprised transients, having regard to the absence cf village sites and A.1. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the the population pattern. existence of village site indicating existence of an established community sometime prior to 1871 1. Appasamudra 1901 (5) even though the village has not returned any 2. Bagganadu Kavalu 1941 (l09) 1911 (12) 1901 popUlation throughout the period 1871-1971. (23)

Nil 3. Bhagavathikere 1901 (8) 4. RayabommanahalJi 1891 (8) A.B.A. Vill8ges having seme popUlation at one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 5. Uttare 1901 (I) 25 HOLALKEKE TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 37 7. Rangasamudra 1911 (9) 1891 Information not available ... 3 (39} 1881 (16) 1891-1901 Balance ... 34 [See note (c)] Of these number having village site ... 14 8. Sadarahalli 1911 (116) 1901 (189) 1891 (171) 188] (ISO) N-Never Inhabited 1871 (276) 1911-1921 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 9. Shanubhoganahalli 1941 (48) during the pa st 150 years as evidenced by their 1931 (107) 1921 (53) 1871 (51) 1871-1881 remaining uninha hited throughout the period 1871- (Second abandonment between 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1941 and 1951) 1. Gandumallenahalli [See note (d)] 2. Garaga 3. Giddanahalli alias A.K. Colony 10. Vaderahalli 1911 (87) 1871 4. Goppanahalli (25) 1871·1881 5. Harogithi Kaval [See note (e)] 6. Hunse Panehe 11. Veerapura 1911 (26) 1901 (46) 7. I,analJalli Kaval 1891 (107) 1881 (.'4) 1871 (62) 1911-1921 8. Kanivehalli 9. Kannenahalli A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ 10. Lingadevarahalli lished settlements, having regard to the population 11. Ramagiri Kaval pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 12. TyagadahaJli (State Forest) census, even though there are no village sites. 1. Mallapura (R) 1921 (25) 1891 (6) A.T. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 1881 (6) 1871 (96) 1871-1881 existence of village site indicating existence of an­ [See note (f)] established community sometime prior to 1871 even though the village has not returned any population NOTB : (a) Arlikere is deemed to be abandoned between throughout the period 1871-1971. 1871 and 1881 when its population declined 1. Amblihalli from 77 to Nil between 1871 and 1881 as it 2. Mulagiranahalli remained unihabited upto 1901. 3. Shankaranahalli (h) Marapura is deemed as abandoned only between 1921 and 1931 ignoring the earlier A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or more decline between 1871 and 1881 from 57 to of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census nil as the population regained the original and also having a village site indicating the exis­ level by 1891. tence of an established community. (c) Rangasamudra is deemed to b~ abandoned Decade of between 1891 and 1901 when the popUlation abandonment declined from 39 to 0 and the subsequent 1. Agrah~ra l!i71 (174) 1871-1881 population of 9 in 19]1 is treated as tran­ 2. Amlapura 1921 (142) 1911 sient. (139) 1901 (171) 1891 (159) (d) Shanubhoganahalli is taken a, abandoned 1881 t92) ]921-1931 between IS7l and 1881 when the popUlation 3. Arlikere 1931 (53) 1921 (57) declined from 51 to nil as it remained 1911 (50) 1901 (13) lll71 (77) 1871-1881 uninhabited for 50 years and became popu­ (Second abandonment between lated only again in 1921. 1931 & 19-tl) (e) Vaderahalli is treated as abandoned between [See note (a)] 1871 and 1881 when its population declined 4. Baragenahalli 1871 (2) 1871-1881 from 25 to nil. The popUlation of 87 5. Kantamaranahalli 1911 (35) returned in 19 11 is deemed transi(:nt. 1901 (12) ]891 (12) 1911-1921 CO Mallapura (R) is deemed as abandoned 6. Marapura 1921 (25) 1911 (72) between 1871 and 1881 when its popUlation 1901 (S9) 1891 (61) 1871 (57) 1921-1931 declined fwm 96 to 6 The popuLltioll [See Il"te (b)] returned in 1921 is treated as transient. 26

T -Tnnsient 3. Jogcrahanumanahalli 1881 (39) 1871 (34) Villages in which the population found during one 4. Kadur Kava! 1891 (4) or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 5. 1871 (40) census is deemed to have comprised transients, 6. Davanhalli 1911 (18) 7. Vamalapura Kaval1921 (4) 1891 (2) having regard to the absence of village sites and the population pattern. The following table shows the number of villages 1. Chikkayemmiganur Kaval 1901 (8) 1891 (86) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 2. Garaga Forest 1871 (53) decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1~81 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1981 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 3 6 3 2

HOSADURGA TALUK Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 39 3. Dalavaihalli 1871 (35) 1871-1881 Information not available ... 5 4. 1921 (9) 1871 (33) 1871-1881 Balance ... 34 [See note (a)] Merged in the adjoining urban area ... 1 5. Handanakere 1961 (102) 1921 ( Rural) (44) 1911 (34) 1871 (49) 1871-1881 Of these number having village site ... 16 [See notc (b)] 6. Bosural 1871 (27) 1871·1881 N-Never Inhabited 7. JogihaJi 1921 (38) 1921-1931 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 8. Kadle Kamasagara 1941 (104) during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 1931 (21) 1921 (52) 1911 (62) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1901 (68) 1891 (61) 1881 (35) 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1871 (28) 1941-1951 1. Bandihalli 9. Kanive S:1.ngenahalli 1871 (19) 1871-1881 2. Byadaraballi 10. Kannagondi 1911 (32) 1901 3. Chikkakarradakatte (120) 1891 (27) 1871 (30) 1901-1911 4. Cbikkatekala va ttikrava! [See note (c)] 5. Hanumanaballi 11. Karadi Katte 1931 (7) 1921 6. Kenchihalli (10) 1911 (6) 1931-1941 7. Thimmalapura 12. Kumarana Kanive 1901 (20) 8. Veerapura Kaval 1891 (17) 1881 (18) 1871 (60) 1871-1881 9. Yeraduguddadasandi Kaval ISee note (d)] 13. Kyadigere Kaval 1961 (55) A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the cxisteace of village site indica1ing existence of an 1921 (37) 1911 (39) 1921-1931 established community sometime prior to 1871 even [See note (e)] though the v,Uage bas not retumeJ any p:>pulatiO[l 14. Niruvagal1921 (6) 1911 (I) throughout the period 1871-1971. 1871 (35) 1871-1881 1. Byrapura [See note (f)1 15. Thippajjanahalli IR91 (41) A.II.A. Villages having SOme popUlation at one or m~re 1881 (66) IS71 (51) 1891-1901 of tbe ten censuses ending with the 1961 CenSllS and also having a village site indicating the existence of A.n.B. Villages which arc deemed to hilve been estab. an established community. ished settlements. having regard to the popUlation Decade of paltern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 abandonment cemus. even though Ihn" are nu village sites. I. AgaThaI' IS71 (27) 1871-1887 1. Neeragunda Kaval !931 (7) 2. Bylahali 1871 (152) 187J-J8RI 1921 (2) 1911 (12) 1901 (10) 1931-1941 27

NOTB : (a) Dasarahalli is taken as abandoned between (f) Niruvagal is treated as abandoned between 1871 and 1881 when its population declined 1871 and 1881 when its popUlation declined from 33 to 0 treating the subsequent popula­ from 35 to nil. The sllbsequent population tion of 9 in 1921 as tnmsient. of 1 in 1911 and 6 in 1931 is treated as (b) Handanakere is taken as abandoned between transient. 1871 and 1881 when its population declined from 49 to nil. The population of 34 and T - Transil~nt 44 in 1911 and 192 I is treated as transient Villages in which the population found during one as also the population of 102 ill 1961. Or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 (c) Kannagondi is treated as abandoned between census is deemed to have comprised transients, 1911 and 1921 when its population declined having regard to the absence of village sites and the from 32 to nil. The earlier decline of popu­ popuiaticn pattern. lation between 1871 and 1881 from 30 to 1. Ballasamudra Kaval1931 (29) 1911 (15) nil is ignored l'S the population reached the 2. 1911 (I21) figure of 27 by 1891. 3. Channapura 1911 (190) 1871 (16) (d) Kumarana Kanive is taken as abandoned 4. Jammapura 1961 (149) 1931 (5) between 1871 and 1881 when its popUlation 5 Kainadu Horkaval 1961 (3) 1941 (3) 1911 (4) declined from 60 to 18 and the decline 6. Mugilodu 1961 (2) continued. 7. Sirigepura 1931 (3) (e) Kyadig,re Kaval is taken as abandoned between 1921 and 1931 as it remained unin­ The following table shows the number of villages habited for 30 years. The pepulation of 55 abandoned before 1871 and during each of the returned in 1961 is treated as transient. decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 9 2 2 1

JAGALUR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 1971 .. .41 existence of village site indicating existence of an Information not available ... 6 established community sometime prior to 1871 even Balance ... 35 though the village has not returned any popUlation Of these number having village site ... 13 throughout the period 1871-1971. 1. Bedarabenakanahalli N-Never Inhabited 2. Bor8pura Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 3. Chikkaurlakatte during the past 150 years as tvidenced by thdr 4. Madakeripura remaining uninhabited throughcut the period 1871- 5. Mugina Chikkenabal1i 1971 and by the absence of village site. 6. Reddihalli 1. ChalJakatte 7. Venkalapura 2. Gudugobanahalli 8. Yerehalli 3. Guheswaranahalli 4. Huchapalanahalli A.I1.A. Villages 11aving some population at one or 5. Lakkenahalli more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 6. Papedevarahalli Ce?SUS and also havin.g a village site indicating the eXIstence of an establIshed community. 7. Rajapura Decade of 8. Rangiahanadurga abandonment 9. TalavarakariyappanahaUi I. Bommaghatta 1931 (8) 1921 10. Varavenaballi (44) 1911 (13) 1881 (~) 1871 (107) 1871-1881 II. Yeramallanahalli [Sre note (a)} 28

2. Channapllra 1931 (5) 1871 (66) 1871-1881 (c) Guddanaikauahalli is taken as abandoned [See note (b)] between 1871 and 1881 when the population 3. Guddanaikanahalli 1921 (II) decreased from 76 to nil. The subsequent 1911 (4) 1871 (76) 1871-1881 population of 4 in 1911 and II returned in (See note (c) ) 1921 is treated as transient. (d) Kolamaghatta is treated as abandoned bet­ 4. Kinigalgbatta 1931 (58) 1921 ween 1931 and 1941 when its population (10&) 1931-1941 declined from 122 to 30. 5. Kolamaghatta 1941 (30) 1931 (e) Badabasavanahalli is treated as abandoned (122) 1921 (77) 1911 (140) between 1921 und 1931. The decline in 1901 (101) 1891 (139) 1881 population from 51 to 3 between 1871 and (48) 1871 (69) 1931-1941 1881 is ignored as population rose to 25 by [Sec note (d)] 1891. The population of 286 returned in 1901 comprised mostly transients. 6. KUfuban:Jhalli 1871 (35) 1871-1881 7. Masanikl1tte 1931 (74) 1921 T -Transient (26) 1911 (55) 1901 (45) 1891 Villages in which the population found during one (53) 1881 (43) 1871 (39) 19.11-1941 or more of the ten consuses ending with the 1961 8. Badabasavanahalli 1921 (II) census is deemed to have comprised transients, 1911 (30) 1901 (286) 1891 (25) having regard to the absence of village site and the 1881 (3) 1871 (51) 1921·1931 population pattern. [See note (c)] 1. Ajjabommanahalli 1931 (78) 2. Anebenakanahalli 1911 (307) NOTE: (a) Bommalaghatta is taken as abandoned bet­ 3. Badabadanahalli 1961 (34) ween 1871 and 1881 when its population 4. Dyamalinganahalli 1911 (11) 1901 (11) declined from 107 to 8, the population 5. Madammanahalli 18tH (54) returned in 1911, 1921 and 1931 being trea­ 6. Seetharasanahalli 1941 (100) 1931 (14) 1901 (60) ted as transient. 7. Thumbaraguddu 1891 (31) 8. Veeravvanagathihalli 1931 (201) 1921 (31) (b) Channapura is taken as abandoned between 1871 and 1881 when the population declined The following table shows the number of villages from 66 to nil. The subsequent population abandoned before 1871 and during eaeh of the of 5 returned in 1931 is treated as transient. decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 8 4 3

MOLAKALMUlW TALUK Total number of uninhabited villnges in 1971 ... 18 3. Sanjeeyarayanakote Information not available ... I Balance ... 17 A.1. Abandoned priOr to 1871 as evidenced by the Of these number having village site .•• 4 exi~ tence of village site indicating existence of an established community sometime prior to 1871 even N-Nevcr Inhabited through the village has not returned any population Villages which had not been inhabited at any time throughout the period 1871-1971. during the past 150 years as evidenced by their Nil remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1971 and by the absence of village site. A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 1. Haravina Diddi ce~sus and also having a village site indicating the 2. Hosanagalapura eXIstence of an established community. 29

Decade of declined from 113 to 33. The pvpulation 1. Hosahalli 1941 (17) 1931 (32) abandonment of 62 in 190 land 25 in 1941 is treated as 1921 (25) 1911 (11) 1901 (29) transient. 1891 (22) 1881 (55) 1871 (78) 1941-1951 (c) Yerrenahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ 2. Jalipente 1881 (14) 1871 (79) 1871-1881 ween 1891 and 1901 when its population [See note (a)1 declined from 30 to O. The subsequent 3. Krishnarajapura 1941 (25) population of 13 in 1911 is treated as tran­ 1901 (62) 1881 (33) 1871 (113) 1871-1881 sient. The decline in population from 35 [See note (b)) in 1871 to nil in 1881 is ignored as popula­ 4. Yerrenahalli 1911 (13) 1891 tion in 1891 was 30. (30) 1871 (35) 1891-1901 (d) Puraboranahatti is treated as abandoned bet­ [See note (c)] ween 1881 and 1891 when its population dec­ lined from 67 to nil. The population of 8 in A.lI.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ 1921 and 11 in 1941 is treated as transient. lished settlements, having re.gard to the population (e) Adavi MaUapura is treated as abandoned pattern during the ten rensuses ending with 1961 between 1921 and 1931 when its population census, even though there are no v ilIage sites. declined from 9 to 1. The earli~r decline from 10 in 1901 to 2 in 1911 is ignored as 1. Puraboranahatti 1941 (11) the population in 1921 was 9. 1921 (8) 1881 (67) 1871 (38) 1881-1891 [See note (d)] T - Transient 2. Rangaiahnadurga 1961 (88) Villages in which the population found during one 1951 (18) 1941 (23) 1931 (12) or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 1921 (32) 1911 (2) 1961-1971 census is deemed to have comprised transients, 3. Thuppadakkaahalli 1941 (24) having regard to the absence of village sites and the 1931 (53) 1921 (82) 1941·1951 population pattern. 4. Adavi Mallapura 1931 (1) 1. Chinivaladagudda 1871 (10) 1921 (9) 1911 (2) 1901 (10) 2. DonetammenahaIli 1911 (1) 1891 (18) 1881 (8) 1891 (19) 1881 (21) 1921-1931 ~. Jilladagundi 1941 (27) [See note (e)] 4. Kamara Kaval 1891 (I) 5. Mahimenahatti 1901 (5) NOTE: (a) Jalipente is taken as abandoned between 6. Matadajogihalli 1941 (52) 1901 (10) 1881 (2) 1871 and 1881 when its population declined from 79 to 14. The following table shows the number of villages (b) Krishnarajapura is treated as abandoned abandoned before 1871 and during each of the between 1871 and 1881 as the population decades from 1871 to 1971. ------Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 1 1 2 1 CHAPTER VI

HASSAN DISTRICT

ALUR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 19 5. Gowlakatte 1951 (28) 1941 Information not available ... 3 (44) 1931 (69) 1921 (73) 1911 Balance ... 16 (SO) 190] (126) 1891 (94) 1831 (76) 1871 (105) 1951-1961 Of these number having village site ... 13 6. Hittalakere 1891 (18) IS81 (11) 1871 (13) 1891·1901 N-Never Inhabited 7. Hosamatha 1881 (2) 1871 (25) 1871-1881 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time [See note (b)] during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 8. Rajapura 1921 (7) 1911 (11) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1901 (I6) 1&91 (10) 1881 (28) 1971 and by the absence of village site ]871 (34) 1921·1931 1. Kamenahalli 9. YalaganahaJ1i 1891 (44) 1881 (41) 1871 (62) 1891-1901 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the exis­ 10. Yarehalli 1881 (21) 1871 (27) 1881-1891 tence of village site indicating existence of an estab­ lished community scmetime prior to 1871 even A.lLB. Villages which are deemed to have been estab. though the village has not returned any population lished settlements, having regard to the population throughout the period 1871-1971. pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 1. Machenahalli census, even though there are no village sites 2. Madagere 1. Dyavanayakunahal!i 1921 (26) 1911 (27) 1901 (20) 1891 (23) 3. Mallenahalli kava I 1881 (30) lS71 (27) 1921-1931

A.I1.A Villages baving some population at one or more NOTE: (a) AniganahalJi is treated as abandoned bet­ 1961 of the ten censuses ending with the census and ween 1891 and 1901 when its population also having a village site indicating the existence of declined from 78 to nil. The popUlation 0: an established community. 14 found in 1921 is treated as transient. Decade of (b) Hosamatha is taken as abandoned between "bandonment 1871 and 1881 when its population declinec 1. Aniganahalli 1921 (14) 1891 from 25 to 2. (7S) 18S1 (6) 1871 (10) 1891-190] [See note (a)] T - Transient 2. Bandigere 1921 (25) 1911 (44) Villages in which the population found during On! 1901 (54) 1891 (50) 1881 (34) or more of the ten censuses eoding with the 196: 1871 (22) 1921-1931 census is deemed to have comprised transients, having regard to the absence of villages sites !lnc 3. Beechalapura 1931 (8) 1921 the population pattern. (12) 1911 (15) 1901 (12) 1891 1. Vajarahalli 1901 (20) 1891 (13) 1871(9) (14) 18&1 (11) 1&71 (25) 1931·1941 4. Danihalli 1921 (34) 1911 (32) The following table shows the number of village. 1901 ()3) 1891 (59) 1881 (85) abandoned before 1871 and during each of thl 1871 (70) 1921·1931 decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 11)61 1871 1881 1891 11.)01 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 3 3 4 1 31

ARKALGUD TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villJges in 1971 ... 42 2. Bommenahalli 1941(21) 1921 Information not available ... 9 (56) 1911(47) 1901(33) 1891 Balance ... 33 (33) 1881(16) 1871(40) 194H951 [See note (a)] Of these number having village site ... 11 3. Kerehosalli 1961 (16) 1941(19) 1931(93) 1921(76) 1911(67) N-Never Inhabited 1901(48) 1891(90) 1881(82) Villages which had not been inhabitcd at any time 1871(178) 1931-1941 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their [See note (b)] remalllmg uninhabited throughout the peried 4. Raghupathi Koppal 1871(9) 1871-1881 1871-1971 and by the 2bs(llce of village site. 1. kaval A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been 2. Ankanaikanaballi kaval established settlements, ha.ving regard to the popu­ 3. Basavanahalli bantha lation pattern during the ten censuses ending with 4. Basavanahalli kaval 1971 census, even though there are no village sites. 5. Bettasoge hantba 1. 1921(187) 1911(46) 6. Dasanakonanur 1901(68) 1891(67) 1881(91) 7. Devarahalli kaval 1871(163) 1921-1931 8. Gabbali kaval 2. Nanjalapura 1961(7) 1901(38) 9. Kanive kaval 1891(27) 1881(24) 1871(25) 1901-1911 10. Kanthenahalli kavel [See note(c)] 11. Kendinne kaval NOTE: (a) Bommenahalli is taken as abandoned 12. K odihalli between 1941 and 1951 ignoring the de­ 13. Gubbi kaval population between 1921 and 1931 as the 14. Naganahalli population in 1941 was more than 1/3 the 15. Basavapatna hantha population in 1921. 16. Beeranahalli (b) Kerehosalli is treated as abandoned between A I . Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 1931 and 1941 when its population declined existence of village site indicating existence of an from 93 to 19. The population of 16 in established community sometime prior to 1871 even 1961 is treated as transient. though the village has not returned any population (c) Nanjalapura is taken as abandoned between throughout the period 1871-1971. 1901 and 1911 when its population declined from 38 to nil treating the popUlation of 7 1. Abbur 2. Apsikatte kayal in 1<:'61 as transient. 3. Baiso or Forest T : Transient 4. Doramaballi Villages in which the population found during one 5. GeddalahosaUi or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 6. Rudrapatna hantha census is deemed to have comprised transients 7. Siddapura having regard to the absence of village sites and th~ population pattern. A.II A. Villages having some population at one or J. KOlavai hantha 1951 (2) more of the ten census ending with the 1961 Census 2, Maradi Basavanahalli 1961(11) and also having a village site indicating the existence 3. Ramanathapura hantha 1911 (4) of an established community. Decade of 4. Vijapura Forest 1901(2) abandonment 1. Bangarahalli 1921(120) 1911 The following table shows the number of villages (86) 1901(87) 1891(114) 1881 abl'.ndoned before 1871 and during each of the (93) 1871(79) 1921-1931 decades from 1871 to 1971.

Bef,-ore IS7! 1831 1891 1901 191 I Inl 1931 J941 1951 1961 1871 1881 H,9l 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 J951 1961 1971 7 I 1 2 I I

------.~------.. ------~------32

ARSIKERE TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 46 7. Maralusiddanahalli 1961(42) Information not available ... 13 1951(34) 1901(58) 1891(22) Balance •.. 33 1881(78) 1871(50) 1901-1911 of these nnmber having village site ... 9 [See note (e)l 8. Mayagondanahosahalli 1921 (2,) 1921-1931 N- Never Inhabittd 9. Shanthanahalli 1931(2) 1921 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time (3) 1911(30) 1871(30) 1871-1881 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their [See note (f)] remaining uninhabit(d throughout the period 1871- Second abandonment between 1911 and 1921 1971 and by the absfl'ce of village site A.II.B. Villages which arc deemed to have been estab­ l. Banarasanahalli lished settlements, having regard to the population 2. Basavanahalli pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 3. Battihalli census, even thougb there are no village sites. 4. Madinipura 1. Channapura 1901(74) 1891(16) 1901-1911 5. Manjenahalli kava! 2. Dyamenahalli 1911(119) 1901 6. Pura (83) 1871 (31) 1911-1921 7. Rangapura kava! (A) [See note (g)] 8. Rangenapura kava! (J) 3. Hampanakatte 1901(8) 1891 9. Singanakere (142) 1881 (38) 1871 (42) 1891-19:)1 10. Thimmappiyanahalli (See note (h) A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 4. Kondilinganahalli 1891(40) existence of village site indicating existence of an 188 I (20) 1871 (32) 189 1-1901 established community sr:-metime prior to 1871 even 5. ThimmasettthalIi 1921(6') though the village has not returned any population 1911(62) 1901(67) 1921-1931 througout the period 1871-1971. NOTE: (a) Byrapura is taken as abandoned between 1871-1881 when its population declined Nil frOID 62 to nil. The subsequent population A.II.A. VIllages having some population at one or of 15 in 1911 is treated as transient. more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 (b) Devihalli is taken as abandoned between cc:nsUS and also having a village site indicating the 1911 and 1921 ignoring the earlier decline of existence of an established community. pnpulation from 13 t() nil between 1871 and Decade of 1881. abandonmet Cc) Hanumaaahalli is taken as abandoned between 1951 and 1961 when the population 1. Byrapura 1911(15) 1871(62) declined from 52 to 7. [See note (a)] 1871-1881 K. 8S 2. Devihalli 1911(70) 1871(13) (d) DiggcnahJlIi is taken abandoned [See note (b)] 1911-1921 between 1871 alld 1881 when its population 3. Eshwarahalli 1951(10) 1941(9) declined from 75 to nil. The popUlation of 1931(26) 1921(23) 1911(42) 25 in 1901 is treated as transi('n t. 1901(37) 1891(32) 1881(29) (e) Maralusiddanahalli is taken as abandoroed 1871(37) 1951-1961 between 1901 and 1911 when the population 4. Hanumanahalli 1961(7) 1951 declined from 58 to nil treating the popula­ (52) 1941(39) 1931(48) 1921 tion found in 1951 and 1961 as transient. (58) 1911(47) 1901(52) 1891 The decline in population from 78 in IB81 (35) 1881(4 I) 1871(73) 1951-1961 to 22 in 1891 i~ ignored as the population [See note (ell increased to 58 in 1901. 5. Kannenahalli 1931(30) 1921 ([) Shanthall2halli is taken as ah l11doned bet­ (45) 1911(15) 1901(34) 18?1 ween .1911 and. 1921 for the second time 1931-1941 whcn Its p:lpUlatIOn dec1in~d from 30 to 3. (32) 1881(6) 1871(67) The first ahand(1nment was between 1871 6 K. Diggenahalli 1901(2') 1871 and 1881 when tile population dcdined from [(75) Sue note (d)] 1871-1881 30 to nil 33

(g) D.vamenahalli is taken as abandoned bet­ 1. Bommagondanahalli 1871(46) ween 1911-1921 ignoring the depopulation 2. Boochenahalli 1911(28) 1891 (4) between 1871 and 1881 as by 1901 the 1871(37) population was more than the population 3. Devarayapatna 191J(6) in 1871. 4. Gopagondanaballi 1921 (6) (h) Hampanakatte is taken as abandoned bet­ 191 J (34) ween 1891 and 1901 when the population 5. Kammarghatta 1901(92) declined from 142 to 8. 6. Keremundinakoppalu 1921 (6) 7. Kurubaraballi 1871(43) T -Transient 8. Rangapura 1901(11) 1881(26) Villages in which the population found during one 1871 (49) or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census is deemed to have comprised transients, The following table shows the number of vill­ having regard to the absence of vi!Jage sites and ages abandoned before 187 I and during each of the population pattern. the decades from 1871 to 197 J.

Before 1871 1881 1~91 1901 J911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 3 2 2 2 2 2 ------

BELUR TALUK Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 .. .42 2. Boovanahalli 1941 (23) 1931 Information not available ... 11 (33) 1921 (24) 1911 (22) 1901 Balance ... 31 (23) 1891 (21) 1881 (29) {l871 Of tbese number having village site ... 20 (91) 1941-1951 3. ChammadevanhaIIi 1931 (144) 1931-1941 N-Never Inhabited 4. Channcnhalli 1921 (79) 1911 Villages whieh had not been inhabited at any time (l08) 1901 (121) 1821 (125) during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 1881 (91) 1871 (140) 1921-1931 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 5. GeddJahalJi 1871 (26) 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1871-1881 I. IlIenahalli 6. Hakkihalli 1941 (13)1911 (21) 2. Motiballi 1901 (104) 1891 (110) 1881 3. Mudigudda Kaval (103) 1871 (ISO) 1901-1911 4. Ramadevarahalli Kuval [See note (0)] 5. Thimmanahalli 1. Harala~atta 1881 (10) 1871 (9) 1881-1891 6. Vajarahalli 8. linigenahalli 1931 (3 1) 1921 (60) 1881 (10) 1871 (10) 1881-1891 A.I. Abandoned prior to 11171 as evidenced by the [See note (b) 1 existence cf village site indicating existence of an 9. Karadagodu 1931 (8) 1921 (42) established community sometime prior to 1871 even 191 1(39) 1901 (54) 1891 (51) though the village has not returned any population 1881 (53) 1871 (47) 1921-1931 throughout the period 1871-1971. [See note (e)] 1. Balenahalli 2. Keshavapura. 10. Kashipura 1961 (8) 1961-1971 A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or 11. MayagondanhaJli 1901 (7) 1901-1911 more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 12. Menasinamane 1901 (19) 1891 census and also having a village &ite indicating the (20) 1881 (36) 1871 (43) 1901-1911 existence of an established community. Decade of 13. Mudalagere 1921 (27) 1921-1931 abandonment 14. Muddanhalli 1881 (7) 1871 (14) 1871-1881 I. Angajanhalli 1911 (15) 1901 [See note (d)] (37) 1891 (20) IS81 (24) 1871 (28) 1911·1921 15. Siddapura lR8! (,,:)2) 187! (97) 188]·1891 34

16. Sirigatta 1951 (58) 1941 (66) (c) Karadagodu is treated as abandoned 1931 (79) 1921 (104) 1911 between 1921 and 1941 when its population (102) 1901 (96) 1891 (I22) declined from 42 to 8. 1881 (92) 1871 (123) 1951-1961 (d) Muddanhalli is treated as abandoned 17. Sompura 1911 (14) 1891 (126) between 1871 and 1881 when its population 1881 (89) 1871 (156) 1891-1901 declined from 24 to 7. [See note (e)] 18. Sulidevarahalli 1941 (4) 1931 (e) Sompura is treated as abandoned between (48) 1921 (40) 1911 (51) 1901 1891 and 1901 when its population declined (64) 1891 (69) 1881 (80) 1871 from 126 10 nil. The subsequent popula. tion of 14 in 1911 was very much less than (56) 1931-1941 1/3 of the population of 1891. [See note (f)] (f) Sulidevarahalli is treated as abandoned between 1931 and 1941 when its population A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ declined from 48 to 4. lished settlements huving regard to the population pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 T-Transient Census, even though there are no village sites. Villages in which the population found during one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 Nil census is deemed to have comprised transients having regard to the absence of village sites and NOTB: (a) Hakkihalli is treated as abandoned between th~ 1901 and 1911 when its population d<:clined population pattern. from 104 to 21. The subsequent popula­ 1. Atbagudda kaval 1901 (6) tion never exceeded 1/3 of the population in 2. Gollenhalli 1931 (6) 1921 (39) 1871 (4) 3. lchenhalli 1911 (20) 1901. 4. Idahalli kaval 1961 (25) (b) Jinigenahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ 5. Kallahalli AM kaval 1961 (9) 1901 (4) ween 1881 and 1891 when its population declined from 10 to nil. The population The following table shows the number of vill­ returned in 1921 and 1931 is treated as ages abandoned before 1871 and during each of the transient. decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 18S1 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 1

CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 23 2. Doothanur Kaval Information not available ... 3 3. Kagga!i Kava! Balance ••• 20 4. Vontigudda Kava! Of these number having village site •.. 10 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the N-Nerer inhabited existence of village site indicating existence of an Villages which had not been inhabited at any time e5tablished community sometime prior to 1871 even during the past 150 years as evidenced by their though the village has not returned any popUlation remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- throughollt the period 1871-1971. 1971 and by the absence of village site. I. Bindenahalli kaval 1. Chamadihalli Ane 2. Jakkenahalli 3. Kagganti Kaval pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 4. Manchiganahalli census, even though there are no village sites. 5. Yarebore Kava1 1. Kashipura 1901 (23) 1891 (29) 1881 (15) 1871 (47) 1901-1911 A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or 2. B. Amanikere 1961 (7) 1951 mOrc of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 (2) 1941 (11) 1901 (9) 1961-1971 census and also having a village site indicating the existence of an established community. NOTB : (a) Hampanahalli is treated as abandoned Decade of between 1901 and 1911 when its population abandonment declined from 23 to nil, treating the popula­ I. Aralabaragur 1961 (25) 1951 tion of 38 returned in 1931 as transient. (13) 1941 (61) 1931 (38) 1961-1971 T-Transient 2. Gobblihalli 1961 (22) 1951 (39) Villages in which the population found during one 1941 (37) 1931 (38) 1921 (43) 1961-1971 or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 3. Gowdagere kava! 1941 (35) census is deemed to have comprised transients, 1931 (54) 1941.1951 having regard to the absence of village sites and the 4. Hampanahalli 1931 (38) 1901 population pattern. (23) 1891 (41) 1881 (26) 1871 1. BisaIaholli 1891 (13) (51) 1901-1911 2. Amanikere 1951 (1) [See note (a)] 3. Janivara Amanikere 1951 (20) 5. Yagati 1911 (25) 1901 (22) 4. Somadevarapura 1921 (1) 1891 (29) 1881 (42) 1871 (48) 1911-1921 The following table shows the number of vill­ A.I1.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab. ages abandoned before 1871 and during each of the lished settlements, having regard to the population decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 193 I D41 1951 1961 1971 5 2 3

HASSAN TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 32 11. Rangapura KavaI Information not available ... 8 12. Sirajbore KavaI 13 . Balance ... 24 S. 14 . Uyyagondanahalli Of these number having village site ... 6 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the N~Never Inhabited existence of village site indicating existence of an Villages which had not been inhabited at any time established community sometime prior to 1871 even during the Plst 150 years as evidenced by their though the village has not returned any popUlation remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- throughout the period 1871-1971. 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1. Machikatte I. Bandihalli 2. Duddavalagere Kava1 A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or 3. Gondi Kaval more of the tcn censuses ending with the 1961 4. Hasuvillabetta KavaI census and also having village site indicating the 5. Hongere Kaval existence of an established community. 6. Karebore Kaval Decade of 7. Kurudbore Kaval abandonment 1. Channammanahalli 1941 (37) 8. MalaH Kaval 1931 (45) 1921 (39) 1911 (48) 9. Mallappanabetta Kaval 1901 (44) 1891 (42) 1881 (26) 10. Rampura 1871 (47) 1941-1951 36

2. Channapura J<.,31 (4) 1921 (15) Note: (a) Channapura is treated as abandoned between 1911 (1 I) 1901 (26) 1891 (J8) 192 I and 193 J wh~I1 its population declined 1881 (40) 1871 (50) 1921-1931 from 15 to 4. [Sec note (a)J (b) Koppalu is treated as abandoned between 3. Doddenahalli 1961 {I 14) 1951 1871 and 1881 when its population declined (lOS) 1941(127) 1931(137) 1921 from 53 to 17. (130) 191 I (108) 1901 (103) (c) Lokanathahalli is treated as abandoned 1891 (86) 1881 (54) 1871 0)3) 1961-1971 between 1911 and 1921 when its population 4. Koppalu 1901 (5) 1891 (6) declined from 55 to 7. The decline in 1881 (J 7) 1871 (53) 1&71-1881 population from 42 in Un1 to 13 in 1881 is [See note (b)] ignored as the population increased to 36 5. Lokanathahalli 1941 (1) 1931 in 1891. (2) 1921 (7) 1911 (55) 1901 (53) 1891 (36) 1881 (13) 1871 (42) 1911-1921 T ~ Transient [See note (c)] Villages in which the popUlation found during one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 A.I1.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ census is deemed to have comprised transients, lisllcd settlements, having regard to the population having regard to the absence of village sites and pattern during the ten censLlses ending with 1961 the population pattern. census, even though there are no village sites. 1. Hullenahalli 1921 (7) 1871 (10) 1. Koppalahalli 1931 (41) 1921 2. Mani Kaval 1961 (4) 1951 (29) (39) 1911 (34) 1901 (49) 1891 (66) 1881 (44) 1871 (l10) 1931-1941 The following table shows the number of vill­ 2. Bingenahalli 1921 (7) 19 II ages abandoned before 1871 and during each of the (43) 1901 (12) 1921-1931 decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 ]881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 I 1 I 2 1 1

HOLE;'IIARASIPUR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited II. Hippeda Amanikere villages in 1971 .. .48 12. Hirebelaguli Hantha Information not available ... 4 13. Hoovinahalli Hantha Balance .. .44 14. Kadavinakote Hantha or these number having sites ... 4 15. Kattebelaguli Hantha 16. KattehosahalIi Hantha N~Never Inhabited 17. Katte Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 18. Kolalubore Kaval during the past 150 years as evidenced by their re­ 19. MarahalJi Kaval maining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 20. Marasettihalli Halltha 19 1 and by the absence of village site. 21. Nanjalapura 1. Amani Chikkere 22. Nerlebore Kaval 2. Amani Doddakere 23. Ontigudda Kaval 3. Amanihirekere 24. Sagar Hantha 4. Ankanathapnra 25. Sanyasi Hosahalli 5. Bagivalu Hantha Singapuranala 6. Belagunda Kava1 26. 27. Srimatada Kava1 I 7. Chilligarahalli 8. Galupura Kaval 28. Uddibore Kaval 9. Gulisathanahalli Hantha 29. Unnenahalli Hantba 10. Hadavinahalli Hantha 30. Yellashapura Hantha A. I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 1. Sagar 1941 (17) 1931 (14) 1921 existence of village site indicating e~istence of an (12) 1')11 (22) 1901 (11) 1891 established c(.mmunity sometime prior to 1871 even (8) 1881 (8) 1941-1951 though the village has not returned any population through.-lUt the period 1871-1971. T -Transient Villages in which lhe popubtion found during one 1. Hangarahomf or more of (he tcn censuses cnding with the 2. Ka1enahalli 1961 census is deemed to have comprised transients. 3. Sunka1ihosur. having regard to the absence of village sites and the pupulation pattern. A.1I.A. Villages baving some population at one or 1. Beechanahalli Hantha 1911 (4) more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 cen­ 2. Beekanahalli 1951 (6) sus and also having a village site indicating the 3. Doddahalli Kaval 1931 (8) 1901 (4) exi>tence of an established community. 4. Gadenahalli 1871 (4) 5. Kalbore Kaval 1891 (4) Decade of 6. Kodihalli 1931 (4) abandonment. 7. Mallasamudra Hantha 1901 (13) 1. D. Nala 1921 (5) 1921-1931 S. Nagarthi Amanikcre 1911 (3) 9. Srt Mataua Kava] II 1911 (2) A.I1.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ lished settlements, having regard to the population The follcwing table shows the number of vill­ pattern during the tcn censuses ending with 1961 ages abandoned before 1871 and during each of the census, even though there are no village sites. decades from 1871 to 1971.

Refore 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971

MANJARABAD TALUK (SAKLESHPUR)

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 8 Decade of Of these number having village site ... 5 abandonment 1. Kadabanahalli 1961 (II) 1951 N-Never Inhabited (14) 1931 (2) 1921 (10) 1911 VIllages which had not been inhabited at any time (11) 1901 (8) 1881 (1:1) during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 1871 (9) 1961-1971 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- lSee note (a)] 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1. Arini Estate 2. Kadagaravalli Estate 1891 (43) 1891-1901 2. Kagenari State Forest 3. Vanagur Estate 1891 (5) 1891-1901 3. Manibigati Estate NOTE: (a) The decline in the population of Kadaba­ A.I. Abandoned prier to 1871 as evidenced by the nahalli from 9 in 1881 to nil in 1891 is existence of village site indicating existence of an ignored as the population in 1901 was 8. established community sometime prior to 1871 even Similarly the decline in population between though the village has not returned any population 1921 and 1931 from 10 to 2 is ignored as throughout the period 1871-1971. the population picked up to 14 by 1951 and 11 by 1961. 1. Bajumane Estate A.I1.A. Villages having some popul:.ttion at one or T-Transil'nt more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 Villages in which the population found during one census and also having a village site indicating the or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 existence (.fan cstublished community. cemus is deemed to have comprised transients, 38

having regard to the absence of village sites and The following table shows the number of vill­ the population pattern. ages abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades from 1871 to 1971. 1. Bisle State Forest 1951 (7)

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 193) 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 CHAPTER VII

KOLAR DISTRICT

BAGEPALLI TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 22 4. Thathannagaridinne 1911 (l 0) Information not available .. , 1 1901(18) 1891(18) 1881(29) Balance ... 21 1871(52) 191I-1921 Of these number having village site .. , 7 5. Thimmiahgaripalli 1961(19) 1941 (3) 1901 (13) 1891 (67) 1891·1901 N-Never Inhabited [See note (b)l Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 6. Thirumaladevarapalli 1921(13) during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 1911(16) 1891(50) 1881(24) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1871(14) 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1891-1901 [See note {e}] 1. Byannagaripalli 2. Gopanavaripalli A.lI.B. Villages which are deemed to have been 3. Kavalaganganadinne established settlements, having regard to the popUla­ 4. Mattedaladinne tion pattern during the ten censuses ending with 5. Pacharlapalli 1961 census, even though there are no village sites. 6. Rendindladinne 7. Singanaikanadinne 1. Narayanareddipalya 1901(2) 8. VadagerivaripaJli 1891(14) 1881(13) 1871(19) 1891.1901 9. Yalakkavaridinne [See note (d)) 2. Zinkapalli 1911(45) 1901(139) A.1. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 1891(30) 1881(22) 1871(46) 1911-1921 existence of village site indicating existence of an established community sometime prior to 1871 even NOTE: (a) Buttiahgaripalli is treated as abandoned though the village has not returned any population between 1891 and 1901 when its population throughout the period 1871-1971. declined from 30 to 6. The subsequent 1. Bathinapalli population in 1931 and 1941 is treated as transient. A.II.A. Villages having some popUlation at one or (b) Thimmiahgaripalli is treated as abandoned more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 between 1891 and 1901 when its population census and also having a village site indicating the declined from 50 to nil as the population existance of an established community. returned subsequently did not exceed 1/3 Decade of of the population in 1891. abandonment (c) Thirumaladevarapalli is treated as aban. 1. Buttiahgaripalli 1941(34) 1931 doned between 1891 and 1901 when its (35) 1901(6) 1891(30) 1881(5) popUlation declined from 50 to nil. The 1871(65) 1891-1901 population retmned in 1911 and 1921 did [See note (a)] not exceed 1/3 the population in 1891. 2. Kaganapalli 1961(78) 1951(64) (d) Narayanareddipalya is treated as abnn­ 1941(76) 1931(97) 1921(83) doned between 1891 and 1901 when the 1911(102) 1901(80) 1891(74) population declined frem 14 to 2. 1881 (52) 1871 (63) 1961-1971 3. Krishnapura 1951(29) 1941 T -Transient (24) 1931(30) 1921(10) 1911 Villages in which the population found during one (14) 1901(16) 1891(39) 1881 or more of the ten censu~es ending with the 1961 (20) 1871 (52) 1951-1961 census is deemed to have comprised transients, 40

having regard to the absence of village sites and the 3. PemmiahgaripaJli 1911(19) population pattern. The following table shows the number of vill­ 1. Kokkuvarupalli 1871(38) ages abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 2. Mangasandra 1881(4) 1871(37) decades from 1871 to 1971. 1931 1941 1951 1961 Before 1871 1881 ]891 1901 1911 1921 1941 1951 1961 1971 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 4 2 1

------~------

BANGARPET TALUK Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 38 4. Kempathimmanahalli 1921 (570) Information nut available .. _I 0 1901 (63) 1891 (49) 1881 (51) Balance ... 28 1871 (69) 1921-1931 Of these number having viliage site ... 10 [See note (b)] 5. KendodimandeI901(18) 1891 N-Never Inhabited (18) 1881(9) 1901-1911 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 6. Kothapalya 1941(37) 1931 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their (107) 1921(91) 1911(87) 1901 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- (120) 1891(104) 1881(71) 1871 1971 and by the absence of village site. (72) 1941-1951 1. Hanumanthapura 7. Thammen~halli 1911(41) 1901 2. HirenaUaguttahal1i (57) 1891(53) 1881(51) 1911-1921 3. Iyyappalli Amanikere NOTE: (a) Ganacharipura is taken as abandoned 4. Kumbara Gollahalli between 1871 and 1881 when its population 5. Majara Reddihalli declined from 75 to 16. 6. Malayanagurki Amanikere (b) KempJthimmanahalli is treated as aban­ 7. Ramapura doned between 1921 and 1931 when its A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the population declined from 570 to nil. - The existence of village site indicating existence of an depopulation between 1901 Ulld 1911 is established community sometime prior to 187 I even ignored as the popUlation in 1921 exceeded though the village has not returned any population that in 1901. throughout the period 1871-1971. A II.B. Villages which are d,~emed to have been 1. Durgepalli established settlements, having regard to the popula_ 2. Naganathapura tion pattern during the ten censmes ending with 1961 3. Obahalli cenSUS, even though there are no viilage sitts. 1. Thippaboinahalli 1911(39) A II.A. Villages having some popUlation at one or 1901(17) 1891(22) 1881(24) 1911-1921 more of the ten censust'S endjng with the 1961 2. Kattapalli 1951(63) 1901(15) census and also having a village site indicating the 1891(12) 1881(14) 1901-1911 existence of an e,tabJished community. Decade of NOTE: Kattapalli is treated as abandoned between abandonment 1901 and 1911 when its popUlation declined from 1. Ganacharipura 1931(3) 1921 15 to nil. The population found in 1961 is deemed (9) 1911(5) 1901(12) 1881(16) transient. 1871(75) 1871-1881 [See note (a)] T-Transicnt 2. Ganddodithimmanahalli 1871 Villages in which the population [oUJid during one (26) 1871-1881 or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 3.' GUVVlllahalli 1921(16) 1911 census is deemed to have compriSed transir nts, (17) 1901(18) 1891(IR) 1881 having regard to the absence of yjllage sites :md the (10) 1921-1931 population pattern. 41

1. Banakanahalli 1931(15) 1921(21) 1871(42) 7. Madivala Majara 1891(49) 1881(23) 2. Chikka Ponnandahalli 1~81 (23) 1871 (78) 8. Persepalli 1871 (5) 9. Thummalahalli 1911(501) 3. Dasarlahalli 1911 (35) 1901(5) 4 Dharam Krishnapalli 1891(18) 1881(8) The following table shows the number of viii· 5. Kasipura 1911(3) ages abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 6. Kattenagasandra 1921(23) decades from 1871 to 1971. ------Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 196 1 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 3 2 2 2 2 1

CHIKBALLAPURA TALUK Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 33 2. 101adaresi 1921 (23) 191 I (11) Information not available .. , 1 1901 (9) 1891 (6) 1871 (40) 1921-1931 Balance ... 32 [See 00te (b)] Of these number having village site ... 11 3. LakshmipathihalJi 1941 (49) 1941-1951 4. Madalanahalli 1871 (29) 1871-1881 N-Never Inhabited 5. NaliaguttshaIli 1911 (65) 1901 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time (52) 1891 (45) 1881 (30) 1911-1921 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 6. Nallanahalli 1871 (59) 1871·1881 remaining uninhabiIed throughout the period 1871· 7. Nareppanahalli 1931 (26) 1921 1971 and by the absence of village site. (26) 1931·1941 1. Amani Doddamaralikere 8. Obalenahalli 1871 (45) 1871-1881 2. Amani Manivakere 9. Pavandahalli 1931 (7) 1921 3. Amani Purnasangarakere (27) 1911 (21) 1901 (53) ]891 4. Amani Reddihallikere (65) 1881 (59) 1871 (131) 1921-1931 5. Billapanagenahalli [See note (c)l 6. Gerumaradahalli 10. Valasenahalli 1901. (5) 1871 7. Gummalapura (64) 1871-1881 8. Hirepade [See note (d)] 9. Kalinayakana Kondenahalli 10. Kenchenahalli A.H.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ 11. Marathammanahalli lished settlements, having regard to the population 12. Sambaragidakavalu pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 13. Venkatapura census, even though there are no village sites. 1. Chikmuddanahalli 1941 (96) A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 1931 (72) 1921 (62) 1881 (7) 1941-1951 existence of village site indicating existence of an 2. D. Kambalahalli 1911 (48) established community some time prior to 1871 even 1901 (46) 1891 (39) 1881 (51) though the village has not returned any population 1871 (34) 1911-1921 throughout the period 1871-1971. 3. Amani Manchanabelekere 1. Mungalahalli 1951 (7) 1941 (5) 1931 (6) 1911 (34) 1901 (5) A.ILA. Villages having some population at one or 1911-1921 [See note Ce) ] more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census and also having a village site indicating the NOTE: (a) Ballagere is treated as abandoned between existence of established community. Decade of 1871 and 1881 when its population declined abandonment from 61 to O. Though some popuiation has 1. Ballagere 1951 (17) 19] 1 (II) been returned from this village in 1901, 1901 (2) 1871 (61) 1871-1881 1911 and 1951 the population never [See note (a)J exceeded 1/3 ufthe popUlation of 1871. 42

(b) Joladarasi is treated as abandoned between population declined from 34 to nil. The 1921 and 1931 when its population declined population fllund in 1931,1941 and 1951 is from 23 to nil. The earlier depopulation deemed transient. between 1871 and 1891 is ignored as the village bec'lme populated again in 1891, T -Transient 190]' 1911 and 1921. Villages in which the population found during one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 (c) Pavandahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ census is deemed to have comprised transients, ween 1921 and 1931 when its population having regard to the absence of viilage sites and the declined from 27 to 7. population pattern. (d) Valasenahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ I. Budda Thimmanahalli 1891 (8) 1871 (22) ween 187 J and 1881 when the population 2. Gollapade 1871 (15) declined from 6-+ to nil. Though some 3. Konenahalli 1951 (29) population was returned in 1901, it was 4. Mudigondavabanadinne 1961 (184) very much less than 1/3 of the population 5. Thirumaladcvaradinne 1951 (I I) of 1871. The following table shows the number of villages (e) Amani Manchanabelekere is treated as abandoned before 1871 and during each of the abandoned between 1911 and 1921 when its decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 5 3 2 2 _.. ----'_,-----,------

CHINTAMANI TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 .•. 72 18. KamaguttahalJi Information not available 3 19. Kambampalli (c) Of these number having village site ... 8 20. Kambampalli (M) 21. Kanikalahalli N-Never Inhabited 22. Karijangalahalli Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 23. Kolimivaripalli during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 24. Amanikere remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 25. Lingadheranahalli 1971 and l">y the absence of village site. 26. Myaka[a Sonnehalli 1. Akkimangalabasavanahalli 27. Nakkalahalli Jodi 2. Amani Kilookantikere 28. Nakkalapalli Gadde 3. Boyipapanahalli 29. Nallaguttapalli 4. Brahmanagadde 30. PilJagundlapalli 5. ChandurapaUi 31. Pottepalli 6. Chikkaganjurgadde 32. Racharlapalli 7. Chikkalakunte 33. Ragimakalahalli 8. Chinnakurapalli 34. See-guttahalli 9. Dhupamakalahalli 35. See tharlapalli 10. Domalap:,lIi 36. Siddepalli 11. Gavipaili 37. Thirumalapura 12. Golapalligadde 38. Y erra lakhnahalli 13. 39. Yerranayakanahalli. 14. Guru ganaj igutta 15. Hudsya Dinne A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 a s evidenced by the 16. lvaripalli existence of vill:lge site indicating existence of an 17. Jogivaripalli established community sometime prior to 1871 even though the village has not returned and population NOTE: (a) Byreddihalli is treated as abandoned bet­ throughout the period 1871-1971. ween 1941 and 1951 when its popUlation declind from 72 to 14. I. Bettiganahalli A.lI.A. Vi!lages having some population at one or (b) Gurralagadde is taken as ab;lDdoned bet­ more of the tcn censuses ending with the 1961 ween 1911 and 1921 when its population census and also having a village site indicating the declined from 67 (0 12. (c) Ampalli is treated as abandoned between existence of an established community. Decade of 1871 and 1881 when its population declined abandonment from 66 to 8. As there was population I. Byreddihalli 1961 (18) 1951 again in 1921, 1931, 1941, 1951 the village (14) 1941 (72) 1931 (47) 1921 is treated as abandoned a second time bet­ (40) 1911 (46) 1901 (82) 1891 ween 1951 and 1961. (46) 1881 (49) 1871 (64) 1941-1951 [See note (a)] T -Transient 2. Chimarajanahalli 1911 (33) Villag,.:cs in which the population found during one 1901 (35) 1891 (29) 1881 (11) or more of the ten censuses ending with tbe 1961 1871 (57) 1911-1921 census is deemed to have comprised transients, 3. Doddamunimagala 1911 (8) having regard to the absence of village sites and the 1901 (11) 1911-1921 population pattern. 1. Ba!ampalli 1931 (6) 4, Gummisettihalli 1891 (44) 2 Balapalahalli 1911 (6) 188J (51) 1891-1901 3. BandarlapaIJi 1961 (28) 1951 (21) 5. Gurralagadde 1921 (12) 1911 4. Bhatradinne 1941 (7) (67) 1901 (68) 1891 (45) 1881 5. Chinncpalli 1931 (28) 1921 (26) 1881 (78) (55) 1911-1921 6. Dasarakunte 1871 (33) [See note (b)] 7. Dodda Arjenahalli 1871 (24) 6. Konga Thimmanahalli 1871 8. Guntapalli 1911 (35) 1901 (36) (49) 1871-1881 9. Karkarlachinte 1921 (17) 1901 (52) 7. Kukkaladinne 1891 (20) 1881 (18) 1891-1901 10. KodigivaripaJli 1871 (44) I], Kottap:llii 1871 (21) A.IlB. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ 12 Nagariamitte 1871 (31) lished settlements, having regard to the population 13. Nagasandragadde 1941 (7) pattern dUI ing the ten censuses ending with 1961 14. pemga;lahalli 187t (25) census, even though there are no village sites. 15. pottarl .. halli 1871 (15) Hi. Talagavara Amanikere 1901 (8) 1. Ampalli 1951 (36) 1941 (34) 17. Ulavakayalahalli un 1 (45) 1931 (27) 1921 (15) 1891 (7) 18. Wadagahalli 1871 (16) 1881 (8) 1871 (66) 1871-1881 19. Yarrapalli 1871 (60) [See note (c) 1 20. Yerrapulli 1931 Second abandonment between m 1951 and 1961 The following table shows the number of vill­ 2. Donapalligadde 1931 (29) age s abandoned before 1871 and during e::lch of the 1921 (22) 1911 (8) 1901 (8) 1931-1941------decades from 1871 to 1971. Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 J92l 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 18S1 1891 1901 191 I 1921 193J 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 2 3 1

GAURIBIDANUR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 .. 26 Balance ... 21 Number for which information is not available 4 Of these number having village sites. . .. 10 Merged in adjoining urban area (Devara­ hosahalli) 44

N --Never Inhabited 7. Yeramadenahalli 1921(47) Villages which had not been inhabited at any 1911(94) 1901(131) 1891(98) time during the past 150 years as evidmced by their 1881 (82) 1871 (207) 1921-1931 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1971 and by the absence of village site. A.I1.B. Villages which are deemed to have been I. Budagathimmanahalli established settlements, baving regard to the popu­ 2. larabandahalli lation pattern during the ten censuses ending with 3. Makllmhalli 1961 census, even thougb there are no village sites. 4. Pidarlahalli 1. Papaganahalli 1891(2) 1881 5. Puttegowdanadinne (11) 1871(11) 1881-1891 6. Shamannakere [See note(e)] 7. Vasanthanahalli NOTE: (a) MaUegowdanadinne is taken as abandoned A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the between 1921 and 1931 when its population existence of village site indicating the existence of declined from 97 to 12. an established community sometime prior to 1871 (b) Murumanehalli is taken as abandoned even though the village has not returned any popu­ between 1901 andl911 when its populationi lation throughout the period 1871-1971. declined from 10 to nil. The population ofl I. Gollahalli 4 returned in 1931 is deemed transient. 2. Naduvaiahalli (c) Nerlahalli is taken as abandoned between I 3. Pillaguttahalli 1891 and 1901 when its population declined from 47 to nil. The depopulation between' A.I1.A. Villages having some population at one more 1871 and 1881 is ignored as the population i of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census and in 1891 was more than half that in 1871. also having a village site indicating the existence of (d) Thimmenahalli is taken as abandoned an established community. between 1951 and 1961 when its population Decade of declined from 12 to nil. The depopUlation abandonment between 1931 and 1941 is ignored as th 1. Channabyrenahalli 1891(60) population in 1951 was half that in 1931. 1881(58) 189 I -1901 (e) Papaganahalli is treated as abandone 2. Devaraddihalli 1921(15) 1911 between 1881 and 1891 when its populatio (11) 1901(13) 1891(20) 1881 dee lined from II to 2. (39) 1871(49) 1921-1931 ~ Mallegowdanadinne 1951(4) T-Transieot 1941(17) 1931(12) 1921(97) 1911(36) 1901(49) 1891(51) Villages in whieh the population found durinJ 1881(21) 1921-1931 one or more of the ten censuses ending with thel96 lSee note(a)] census is deemed to have comprised transient 4. Murumanehalli 1931(4) 1901 having regard to the absence of village sites and th1 (10) 1891(7) 1881(12) 1901-1911 population pattern. [See note(b)] 1. Chapparahalli 1901(6) 5. Nerlahalli 1891(47) 1871(86) 1891-1901 2. JogireddihaUi 1961 (3) [See note(c) J 3. Komarlahalli 1941(10) 1931(30) 6. Thimmenahalli 1951(12) 1931 (24) 1921(23) 1911(25) 1901 The following table shows the number of vill (16) 1891(20) 1881(13) 1951-1961 ages abandoned before 1871 and during each of t LSee note (d)] decades from 1&71 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 3 1 2 1 3 1 ... $

GUDlBANDA TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in Decade of 1971 24 abandonment Of these number having viHage site 8 1. Gajala Bisslahalli 1871(12) 1871-1881 N-Never Inhabited 2. Kodigel1ahalli 1871(42) 1871-1881 Villages which had not been inhabited at any 3. Nallojanahalli 1961 (38) 1951 (36) time during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 1941(33) 1901 (4) 1961·1971 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 4. Oochalahalli 1901(5) 1901.1911 1971 and by the absence of village ~ite. 5. Pallaiahgarahalli 1891(39) 1. Chandumanahalli 1881(39) 1891-1901 2. Channarayanahalli 6, Pyayalachinnappanahalli 18 1 3. Egenahalli (18) 1871(32) 1881-1891 4. HosaycrrahaIli 7. Thummenahalli 1961(6) 1951 5. Jhanti bhoyan8halli (7) 1941(43) 1931(28) 1921(41) 6. Kurubarahosalli 1911(68) 1901(74) 1891(90) 7. Lakshmanapura 1881 (81) 1871 (98) 1941·1951 8. Ragimakalahalli [See note(a)] 9. Thangadikunte 8. Varlakondahalli 1901(861) 10. Vabasandra Anapnahalli 1891(763) 1881(609) 1871(948) 11. Vaddumaravehalli 1901-1911 [See note(b)] A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the existence of village site indicating existence of an NOTE: (a) ThummenahaIli is treated as abandoned established community sometime prior to 1871 even between 1941 and 1951 when its population dedined from 43 to though the village has not returned any population 7. throughout the period 1871-1971. (b) The population figures given for Varla­ kondahaIli for 1871,1881,1891 & 1901 in -Nil- the consolidated village population Tables for the period from 1871 to 1911 appear to A.I1.A. Villages having some population at One or relate to Vorlakonda another villages in the more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 same taluk. The figures for Vorlakonda and census and also having a village site indicating the Vorlakondahalli for all the eleven censuses existence of an established community. given below will substantiate this yjew.

1871 1881 1891 1901 19I1 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 Vorlakonda 57 12 899 892 1027 975 1023 1235 1553 Vorlakonda- halli 948 609 763 861

T -Transient 3. Kadenahallidinne 1921 (16) Villages in which the population found during 4. Kalikipapanadinne 1901(2) 1881(3) 1871(3) one or more of the len censuses ending with the 5. Nimmalaha1!i 1901(3) 1961 census is deemed to have comprised transient, having regard to the absence of village sites and The follOWing table shows the number of vill­ the population p 2 ttern. ages abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 1. Gaddamn~ganadinne 1911(38) decades from 1871 to 1971. 2. Gyadarhahalli 1921 (26)

1871 1901 1911 1921 Before 1881 1891 1931 1941 1951 1961 1&71 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 1 2 1 1 46

KOLAR TALUK Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 45 6. Sujjanahalli 192 [( 18) J 9 J 1(16) Information not available ... 8 1901 (16) 1891 (17) 1881(26) 1871 (87) 1871·1881 Balance ... 37 [See note(b)1 Of these number hwing v:Uage site ... 9 7. Swamigalagollahalli 1931(9) N-Never Inhabited 1921(22) 1911(31) 1891(38) 1881(27) 1931·1941 Villages which had not been inh;:tbited at any time [See note{c)] during the past 150 years as evidenced by their remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- AII.B. Villages which are deemed to have been 1971 and by the absence of villages site. established settlements, having regard to the popu­ 1. Adakethota lation pattern during the ten censuses ending with 2. Allidinne 1961 census, even though there are no village sites. 3. Balanagenahalli 1. Analakunte 1911 (39) 1901 (21) 4. Chillapalli Amanikere 1891(32) 1881(28) 1871(30) 1911-1921 5. Chinnenahalli 2. Bandurkrislmapura 1961 (31) 6. Devanapura 1951(37) 1941(35) 1931(39) 7. Gopasandra 1921(36) 1911(34) 1901(32) 8. Kaparasiddanahalli 1891(19) 1881(12) 1961-1971 9. Kyalanoor Amanikere 3. Dinnehalll 1901(11) 1891(40) 10. Mylasandra Khayamgutta 1881(46) 1871(86) 1891·1901 II. Parapanahalli [See note(d)J 12. Ramabhadrapura 4. Papenahalli 1951(25) 1941(14) 13. Ramapura 1931(46) 1921(46) 1911(33) 14 Singareddihalli 1901(42) 1091(40) 1881(41) 1951-1961 15. Thalagondapuraballi. [See note (e)] 5. Venkatapura 1941(31) 1931 A.t Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the (37) [921(30) 1911(28) 1901 existence of village site indicating existence of an (28) 1891(17) 1881(6) 1941·1951 established community sometimes prior to 1871 even though the village has not returned any population NOTE: (a) Nandtkamanahalli is treated as abandoned throughout the period 1871-1971. between 1871 and 1881 when it, population I. Gurrappanuhalli declined from 24 to Nil. The population of 2. Mittalakal!ahalli 4 returned in 1951 is treated as transient. (b) Sujjanahalli is treated as abandoned between A-II.A. Villages having some population at one or 1871 and 1881 when its popUlation declined more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 from 87 to 26 Though the village conti­ census and also having a village site indicatjllg the nlled to be populated uptD 1921, the existence of an established community. population never picked up after its declined betwe.. n 1871 and 1881. Decade of (c) Swamigalagollahalli is treated as abandoned abandonmer,t between 1931 and 1941 when its population l. Kodihalli 1951(16) 1951-1961 d(c1ined from 9 to nil iguoring the depopu­ 2. Lingapura 1921(41) 1911(27) lation between 1891 and 1901 as the popu­ 1901(49) 1891(23) 1881(21) lation in 1911 was more than 3/4 of the 1871(49) 1921-1931 population in 1891. (d) Dinnehalli is treated as ab:lllduned betWeen Mylasandra Amanikere 1951 (4) 1951-1961 3. 189 ( and 1901 when its population declined 4. Nandikamanahalli 1951 (4) from 40 to 11. 1871(24) 1871·1881 (e) Papenahalli is treated as abandoned [See note(a)] between J 951 and 196), when the popUlation 5. Sambapura 1891(25) 1881(21) declined from 25 to Nil. Th0 decline in. the 1871(37) 1891·1901 population from 46 to 14 between 1931 and '4'

1941 is ignored II~ the population in 1951 2. Beemapura 1931(79) was more than 1/3 of the population in 3. Bettahalli 1951(12) 1941(32) 1871(12) 1931. 4. Byachapura 1951(17) 1948(1) 1921(10) 5. CharaJdinne 1921 (30) T-Transient 6. Jayasandra 1911(33) Villages in which the population found during one 7. Obenahalli 1901 (6) or more of the ten censuses ending wilh the 1961 S. Upavasapura 1871 (62) census is deemed to have comprised transients, having regard to the absence of village sites and the The following table shows the number of villages population pattern. abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 1. Andiganahalli 1871(101) decades from IS71 to 1971.

Before 1871 i8S1 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 188L 1891 1901 1911 1921 19.31 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 2 2 1 3

MALUR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 74 21. Sheikhmanpura Information not available ... 8 22. Sulikunte Balance ... 66 23. Thameehalli Of these one village (Malur RUed!) has been 24. Thimmanahalli merged in the adjoining urban area leaving 25. Thornahalli (Agrahara) only 65 villages for study. . .. 65 26. Thotagowdana (Amanikcre) Of these number having village site .. 13 27. Yagnavadani 28. Yakkadoddi N-Never Inhabited 29. YarrappanalJaIli Villages which had not been inhabited at any time during the past 150 years as evidenced by their A I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the remaining uninhahted throughout the period 1871- existence of village site indicating existence of an 1971 and by the absence of village site. established community sometime prior to 1871 even I. Amani Arasikere though the village has not returned any population 2. Amani Kanchugaranaken: throughout the period 1871-1971. 1. B31ahJlIi Hosaballi 3. Basavanaikanabal1i 2. Kamarakote 4. Budihalli 3. Kempasandra 5. Channarayapura 4. Mel1l'sinetha 6. Chokkapura 5. Ommasandra 7. Eswaranahalli 6. Yalesandra S. Hosa Kurandarahalli (Plantation) Kallipura 9. A.II.A Villages having some popUlation at one or mOre 10. K anachickanaha 11 i of the ten censuses enL'ing with the 1961 census and II. Karagahalli Kariysppanahalli also having a village site indicating the existence of 12. an established community. 13. Kondarajanahalli Decade of 14. Korachanoor abandonment 15. Kurandahalli (PLantation) 1. Byappanahatti 1961 (9) 1951 K urubarahalli 16 (36) 1911 (15) 1911-1921 17. Marasettihalli [See note (;1)1 18. Nachohalli 2. Chandanahalli 1901 (2) 1891 19 Noothana Krishnapura (10) 1881 (9) 1871 (,0) 1871-1881 20. Patiganahalli [Sec note (b)] 48

3. Karakamakanahalli 1871 (35) 1871-1881 the population declined from 55 to 6 during 4. Mullakamanadoddi 1931 (25) 1931-1941 this decade and the population subsequently 5. Nanjapura 1871 (18) 1871-1881 did not exceed 1/3 of the population in 6. Suddukunte 1891 (6) 1881 (10) 1871. 1871 (55) 1871-1881 Ce) Segepura is treated as ahandoned between [See note (c)] 1891 and 1901 when the populatiun declined 7. ThimmapUia 1871 (26) 1871-1881 from 10 to 3. A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to bave been estab­ (f) Keshavanahatti is treated as abandoned lished settlements, having regard to the population between 1881 and 1891 when its population pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 declined from 14 to 2. census, even though there are no village sites. T-Traosient I. GadamsonnahaIli 1901 (32) Villages in which the population found during 1891 (35) 1881 (18) 1871 (48) 1901-1911 one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 2. Madanahatti Venkatapura 1911 196 I ce nsus is deemed to have c ,1m prised transients, (11) 1901 (12) 1891 (10) 1881 (6) 1871 (55) 1871-1881 having regard to the absence of village sites and [See note (d)] the popUlation pattern. 1. Badakanahalli 1931 (2) 3. Segepura 1911 (1) 1901 (3) 1891 (10) 1881 (8) 1871 (16) 1891-1901 2. Bakarahalli 1871 (90) [See note (e)] 3. Balanahalli Plantation 1881 (5) 1871 (36) 4. Kesavanahatti 1891 (2) 1881 4. Bandarlahalli 1881 (14) 1871 (48) (14) 1871 (3) 1881-1891 5. Byranahosahalli 1911 (3) 1891 (2) 1881 (2) [See note (f)] 6. Chikkasandra 1871 (47) 7. Dinneri Plantation 1951 l289) NOTE: (a) Byappanahatti is treated as abandoned bet­ 8. Gangasandra 1921 (11) 1911 (21) ween 1911 and 1921 when its population 9. Hanumanthapura 1921 (42) declined from 15 to nil. The population 10. Harada Kothur 1871 (48) found in 1951 and 1961 is deemed tran­ 11. Koppathimmanahalli 1871 (30) sient. 12. Kothakotathimmanahalli 1871 (46) 13. Linganahalli 1901 (7) (b) Chandanahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ ween 1871 and 1881 as its population dec­ 14. M. Sonnahalli 1891 (13) 1881 (15) 15. Ramachandrapura (Plantation) 1961 (54) lined from 30 to 9 during this decade and the subsequent population never exceeded 16. Rangiahanagrahara 1911 (29) 1/3 of the population in 1871. 17. Sivarapatna (Amanikere) 193 I (6) 18. S onnanadoddi 188 I (12) 1871 (17) (c) SUddukunte is treated as abandoned bet­ 19. Tharanahalli 1871 (3) ween 1871 and 1881 when its population declined from 55 to 10. The following table shows the number of villages (d) Madanahatti Venkatapura is treated as abandoned before 1871 and during each of the abandoned between 1871 and 1881 when decades from 1871 to 1971.

--~~-~-~------Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 6 6 2

MULBAGAL TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in Information not available ... 6 1971 ... 42 Merged in the adjoining urban area (Mulba- Balance ... 35 gal Rural) ... 1 Out of these number having village site ... 16 49

N-Nevef Inhabited 8. Knthapalli 1891 (4) 18~1(7) Vdlagcs which had not b.;Cll illhab:tcd at any 1871(18) 1891-1901 time duri;lg the past IS) years ;,s evi(l.enced by their 9. Kummarakl1l1t~ 1881(35) 1881-1891 rrma:nilCg unbha'.lltcd ,hroagl\;~ut the period 1871- 10. Puhkl:nllah:ll!j 1'>21(27) 1911 1971 and by til;,! absence of yl!i:lge !;itc. (47) 19,,1(38) 18'Jl(35) IS81 1. Bhumanalialh (29) 1871(51) 1921-1931 2. Bvl1ll11~ldas:m:illalii 11. Siddilliahalli 1881(8) ]881-1891 3. Chandamam1rlaballi 12. Thurukarahalli 1891(6) 1881(9) ell· kkahonasettihalli 1871(6) 1891-1901 5. Chikkamaderahalii 13. Vi[t31arura 1911(395) 1911-1921 6. IlF1!llkerc A.II. :~;. Villages which nre deemed to have been 7 Jalianag(rlahalli established settlements having regard to the popu­ 8. ;.!Jgn·"nahalli lation pattern during the ten censuses ending with 'i. Sf'ilm.pura 196! census, even though there are no village sit.:s. I')' T:llilul'::'H'ha I. Dasarnlli 1901(45) 1891(39) A.!, Abandl):1ed prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 1881(31) 1871(18) 1901-1911 exist~nce of villo'ge site iC1E:;:;.tiJlg cxisicncc of an 2. Hosa:lagenahalli 1911(38) 190] c,r:::bli:,hed community sometime prior to 1871 (26) 1891(18) 1881(22) ]911-1921 even thOl):~h th; vi'lage has not ret!lrncd any popu­ 3. Kusandra 1901(30) 1891(14) htion tilrough:ut the period 1871-1971. 1881 (21) 1901-1911 Narasipurdhinne 1911(63) 1. Ch,llllan I yak ana halli 4. 2. Kanagaladinne 1901(53) 1891(54) 1881(35) 3. Ubbll'l:ll

(10) 1911(28) 190!(81) 1891 Th·~ foll.,wing table shows the number of vil:ag~s (54) 18d(S7) ]871(126) 1911-1921 abarodoned before 1871 and during each of the lS,c note(e)] deead~s from 1871 to 1971. Ler"orc 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 ]9(,1 J - 187 1881 1891 1901 1911 l' 21 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 3 1 2 2 2 -'-_ ------.------~- 6 2 1 I ._----­-----_ 50

SIDLAGHATTA TALUK census and also having a village site indicating the Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 55 existence of an established community • Information not available .. , 5 Balance ... 50 .. , 6 Decade of Of these number having village site abandonment N - Never Inhabited Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 1. Cheelambommanahalli 1911 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their re­ (16) 1901 (15) 1891 (22) 1881 maining uninhabited throughout the peflod 1871- (56) 187! (70) 1911-1921 1971 and by the absence of village site. 2. I varahalli 1911 (7) 1881 (15) 1871 (50) 1871·1881 1. Amani Dasenahalli ( See note (a) ) 2. A valakondarayanahalli 3. Muddannadinne 1931 (5) 1921 3. Bandappanahalli (10) 1911 (64) 1901 (30) 1891 4. Barlahalli (36) 1881 (42) 1871 (34) 1911-1921 5. Basavapatna KG ( See note (b) ) 6. Belinayakanahalli 4. Yerrappanahalli 1921 (50) 1921-1931 7. Channammanaikanaphade 8. Ghatarlahalli A.n.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ 9. Haradi Plantation lished settlements, having regard to the population 10. Hosakere pattern during the tcn censuses ending with 1961 11. Plantation census, even though there are no village sites. 12. Kadadanakunte 1. Gyaradi 1961 (2) 1931 (20) 13. Kadiripura 1921 (39) 1911 (18) 1901 (90) 14. Kempasanipade 189{ (57) 1881 (60) 1871 (98) 1931-1941 15. Kokkara Makalahalh ( See note (c) ) 16. Koogathimmanahalli 2. Kolimihosur 192! (16) 1911 17. Koppala chinnappanahalli (28) 1901 (10) 1891 (II) 1921-1931 IS. Korathaguttahalli 3. Ramenahalli 1911 (18) 1901 19. Melukunta (26) 1891 (20) 1881 (169) 1871 20. Mutchataladinne (41) 1881-1891 21. NallaguttahaIli (See note (d) ) 22. N allenahalli 23. Obalapura NOTE: (a) Ivarahalli is taken as abandoned between 24. Patalammanah:.t;,. 1871 and 1881 when the population declined 25. patrahalli from 50 to 15. The population of 7 returned 26. Silaradinne in 1911 is far less than 1/3 of the population 27. Thambalahalli in 1871. 28. Thavarevaddu (b) Muddannadinne is taken as abandoned bet· 29. T. Kurubarahalli ween 1911 and 1921 when its population 30. Yarechanapura declined from 64 to 10. Yedlapadi 31. (e) Gyaradi is taken as abandoned between A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the exis­ 1931 and 1941 when the population declined tence of village site indicating existence of an estab· from 20 to nil. The decline in population lished community sometime prior to 1871 even from 90 to 18 between 1901 and 1911 is though the village has not returned any population ignored as the population in 1921 was more throughout the period 1871-1971. than 1/3 of that in 190], (d) Ramenhalli is taken as abandoned between 1. Balegowdanahalli 1881 and 189! when its population declined 2. Sanjeevapura from 169 to 20. The population returned A.I1. A. Village~ having some population at one or in 1901 and 1911 was far less than 1/3 of more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 the population in 1881. 51

T-·Transient 4. Gowdanakere 1931 (9) 1921 (66) Villages in which the population found during one 5. G. Peddanahalli 1921 (2) 1871 (59) or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 6. Gummanahalli 1891 (4) 1871 (24) cenSllS is deemed to have comprised transients, 7. Karayanapura 1951 (11) having regard to the absence of village sites and the 8. Marabahalli 1941 (11) 1901 (8) 1891 (1) population pattern. 9. Nellimarndahalli 1951 (6) 1931 (2) 1921 (338) 10. Purabyrenahalli 1881 (19)

1. Amani Bandammanakere 1901 (10) The following table shows the number of villages 2. Ammanakere 1931 (5) 1921 (19) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 3. Chikkachinnappanahalli 1891 (10) 1871 (25) decades from 1871 to 1971.

Bcfne 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 1 2 2 1

SRINIV ASPUR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 58 22. Thammepalli Merged in adjoining urban area 23. Valasepenta ( Rural) ... 1 Information not available ... 7 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the Balance ... 50 existence of village site indicating existence of an Of these number having village site ... 13 established community sometime prior to 1871 even though the village has not returned any population N -Never Inhabited throughout the period 1871·1971. 1. Mallampalli Villages which had n,'1 been inhabited at any time 2. Settivaripalli during the past 150 years as evidenced by their remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871· A.UA. Villages having some populatioll at one or 1971 and by the absence of village site. more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census and also having a village site indicating the 1. Amani Narasimhanayakanakere existenc'! of an established community. 2. Amani Tbirumalappanayakanakere 3. Amani Vasanthanayakanakere Decade of 4. Bandarlapalli abandonment 5. Chigarekunte 6. Devasandra KG. 1. Advikmapalli 1961 (25) 1951 7. Ejakunte (33) 1941 (68) 1931 (51) 1921 8. Inimakalapalli (44) 1911 (87) 1901 (69) 1891 9. Jalagundlapalli (66) 1881 (45) 1871 (96) 1961.1971 10. Lingarajapura 2. BasavanatLa 1941 (37) 1931 11. Nachagadde (31) 1921 (19) 1891 (6) 1881 12. Nalapalli (K) (7) 1871 (47) 1871-1881 13. Narasimhapura (KG) (See note (a) ) 14. Pathapalli Abandoned for the second time between 1941 & 15. Peddanachapalll 1951 16. Raghunathapura 3. Bommareddipalli 1911 (1) 17. Ragimakalapalli 1881 (52) 1871 (64) 1881·1891 18. Rujapalli (See note (b) ) 19. Ramapura 4. Boyinachapalli 1961 (17) 1891 20. Srinivasapur Amanikere (14) 1881 (16) 1871 (15) 1891-1901 21. Sunnaguttapalli (See note (c) ) 52

5. Chilakalanatha 1921 (10) 1911 (b) B0mmarcddipalli is treated ,.s al andoned (21) J901 (lG) 1891 (26) 18S1 bctV,(Cll 1681 and 1891 when the popula­ (22) 1871 (37) 1921-1931 linn declined frem 52 to r:il treating the 6. Doddaragul:,din; a 1951 (24) population returned in 1911 as trall5ilnt 1941 (19) 1911 (36) 1921 (50) Cc) Boyinachapalii is tleated !:s aband' n"d 1911 (59) 1901 «()3) 1891 (47) between 1891 and 1901 when the pop:.dation 1881 (11) 187103) 1951·1961 declined from 14 to nil. The p('pulatiull (See note (d) ) cf 17 returned in 1961 is treated as tran­ 7. Jangamasettil)alli 1921 (20) &ient. 1911 (39) 1~()1 (42) 1891 (26) (d) D\~ddaragulad:nna is treatcd as abandolled 1881 (28) 1871 (57) 1921 1931 between 1951 and 1961 ignoring the cdf1ier 8. Lakkavaddipalli 1951 (28) decline in pDpulation from 73 to II bet- 1941 (54) 1931 (76) 1921 (76) I,e(n J87i and 1881 as the population by 1911 (100) 1901 (114) 1891 1891 WJS more than 1/3 the popul tion in (69) 1881 (52) 1871 (121) 1951-1961 PIn 9. KatamguntapaHi 1951 (23) (e) MarcJup

MANUYA DISTRICT

KRISHNARAJPET T ALUK 2. V«('fedevarahosur 1951 (4) Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 33 1941 (43) 1931 (62) 1921 (36) Information not avaIlable 4 1911 (104) 1901 (Ill) 1891 New villages crrated taking 1/3 lands of (69) 1881 (67) 187] (81) main village's 2 (See note (a) ) 1941-1951 Balance; .. 27 3. Kachanahalli 1901 (3) IR91 (17) 18RI (13) 1871 (62) Of these number having vjllage site ... 8 (See Dote (b) ) 1871-1881 N- Never Inhabited 4. Mallennhl1lli 1941 (24) 191 I (14) (See Dote (c) ) Villages which h'ld not b~cn inhabited at any time 1911·1921 dUJ ing t1 e past 150 ye::trs as evidenced by their 5. Nandipura 1951 (37) 1941 remaining uninhnbittu throughout the period IS71- (100) 1931 (103) 1921 (145) 1971 and by the absence of village site. 191 I (160) 1901 (149) 1891 (L'O) 1881 (111) 187 I (10]) 1951-1961 l. AnIcanathapura 2. Dal1enahalli Kaval NOTE: (a) Veeredev;lfahosur is tahn as abandoned 3. betWEen 1941 and : 95] whC'n its POpulation declined from 43 to 4. 4. Darnl11alapura 5. Hosur (b) Kachanahalli is treated as ab'l.lldoned bctwem 1871 and 1831 whell its population declined 6. Karthalu from 62 to 13. 7. M~d:'puranala (c) Maliena:ialli is taken as abaildoned between 8. Mandaz<:rcnula 1911 and ]nl when its poptIlation dec1int:d 9. Sllugadde Bldara Katte Kal'al from 14 to Nil. The population of 24 found 10. Thammadahalli in 1941 is treated as transient. 11. Uddibore Kaval T -Transient A. I. Abal~doned prior (0 1871 as evidenced by the Villages in which the population found during one existence of viU;:ge ";:~ inJicating existence of an or more of the ten cenSllses ending with the 1961 establi~.h~d COi1;munity sometime prior to 1871 cen~us is deemed tn have com,~ris:d transients, even though th'~ vi!Jage has not returned any popul­ having regard to the absence of vilLtge sites and ation throughout the pt'riOli 1871-1971. the populati,m pattern. K:lVal 1901 (2) 1. GJ.tganahalli 1. 2. Biliganahalli 1921 (10) 1901 (5) 2. Kodihalli 3. 1921 (2) 3. Naganahalli 4 Chandagonahalli 19II (4) 5. Gopal:Jpura 1891 (83) 1871 (28) A. n. A. Villages having SJme population nt one or 6. Hosngaddc 1891 :75) more of the ten Ct:l1Suses ending with the 1961 7. Kallahalli 1941 (7) CCllSllS and also havllIg a village site indicating the 8. Kikkcri Amanikere 1911 (17) i901 (19) existenc: of :tn established community. NOTE: In 1961 the population of Aghalaya village Decade of af'pi!ars to have been split up hetween Aghlaya abandonment & Aghaldya Kavd, as would be ckar frum the 1. Dorapura 1881 (10) 1871 (30) 1881-1891 following figures: 54

1941 1951 1961 197] The following table shows the number of villages Aghalaya 883 1]13 462 1285 abandoned before 1871 and during each of the Agbalaya Kaval - 715 decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 3

MADDUR TALUK

Total number of unjnhabited villages in 1971 ... 6 A. II. A. Villages raving some population at one or Information not available ... I more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 Balance ... 5 census and al,o having a village site indicating the Of these number baving \iIlage site ... 3 existence of an established community.

N-Ncver Inbabited Decade of Villages which had not been inhabited at any time abandonment during the past 150 years as evidenced by Ineir I. Mobbalagere 1931 (4) 1921 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- (8) 1911 (2) 1901 (4) 1891 (4) 1971 and by the absence of village site. ]881 (26) 1871 (59) 188l-l891 1. Hunaganapura 2. Venkatanaraya na doddi 1891 2. Lakkasandra (II) 1881 (23\ 1871 (53) 1891-1901 NOTE: Mobbalagere is treated as abandoned between A. I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 188 I and 1891 when ils population declined existence of village site indicating existence of an from 26 to 4. estabilished community sometime prior to 1871 even though the village has not returned any popu­ The following table shows the number of villaflcs lation throughout the period 1871-1971. abandoned before 1871 [md during each of the 1. Danaikanadoddi decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 ]92] 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 189] 1901 191 I 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 1

MALAVALLI TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 19 5. Shivanahalli or these number having village site ... 6 6. Yamadur Kaval

N-Never Inhabited A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidence,i D. ' , Villages which had not been inhabited at any time existence of Village site indicating existence of an during the past 150 years as evidenced by their re­ established community sometim~ prior to W71 even maining uninhabittd throughout the period 1871- though the viIJage has nGt returned any population 1971 and by the abswce of village site. throughout the period 1871. I 97 I. 1. Kodipura. 1. Bandur Kaval 2. Chikkahebbagilu Hantha A.I.I A. Villages having some population at one or 3. Halaganadoddi more of the ten censuses ending with the 19D 1 cen­ 4. Majjigemallana Hatti sus and also having a village site indicating the 55

~ .istence of an established community. NOTE: Muttalakatte is taken as abandoned between 1951 and 1961 when its population declined Decade of from 15 to nil. The decline in population from abandor.ment 37 in 19~1 to 9 in 1951 is ignor.:d as the popu­ I. Asali Shivapura 1891 (11) lation rose to 15 in 1961. 1881 (7) 1871 (5) 1891-1901 2. Basavanahalli 1871 (21) 1871-1881 T - Transient 3. Ka1adevanahalli 1901 (14) Villages in which the population found dUriIlg one 1891 (13) 1881 (9) 1871 (9) 1901-1911 or more of the ten cenmses ending with the 1961 4. Kabbepura 1il91 (26) 1881 census is deemed to have compris::d transients, (36) 1871 (6!) 1891-1901 having regard to the absenCe! of village sites and 5. Maralahalli (1921) (279) 1911 the population pattern. (348) 1901 (312) Ul91 (304) 1921-1931 1. Basavanabetta (Forest) 1961 (116) 1951 (6~) A.I1.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ 2. Devalinganapura 1881 (12) 1871 (56) lished settlements, having regard to the population 3. Kiragasur 1881 (13) 187 I (33) pattern during the ten cen5uses ending with 1961 4. Konnapura J921 (9) 1911 (12) 1881 (5) 1871 census, even though there are no village sites. (22) I. Muttalakatte 1961 (15) 1951 5. Veerajithimmanadoddi 1931 (48) (9) 1941 (37) 1931 (24) ,921 (S) 1911 (15) 1901 (20) 1961-1971 The following table ,hov.s the number of villages 2. Talavadi 1941 (42) 1931 {2S) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the de­ 1921 (57) 1901 (24) 1881 (30) 1941-1951 cades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 2 I .------_.------

MANDYA TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 .•. 10 A.I1.A. Villages having some population at one or 1110re Information not available '" 2 of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census & Bdlance ... 8 also having a village site indicating the existenc~ of Number of these having village site ... 2 an established community.

N- Never Inbabited Decade of Villages wbich had not been inhabited at any time abandonment during th~ past 150 years as evidenced by their 1. Chikkathammanahalli 1941 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 187 J- 1971 aud by the absence of village site. (43) 1931 (39) 1921 (26) 1911 (32) 1901 (25) 1891 (10) 188l 1. Hydarahalli (26) 1871 (46) 1941-1951 2. Mahadevarahalli 2. G. Hosahalli 187] (18) 1871-' ~81 3. NBrasipuradakoppal 4. Thriyambakapura 3. Devarayapatna 1931 (64) 1891 (I]) 1881 (20) 1871 (55) 1891·1901 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as rvidcIlced by the exis­ tence of village site indic'lting existence of an estab­ NOTE: Devarayapatna is treated as abandoned betwe.'n lished community sometime prior to 1871 even 1891 and 1901 when its popUlation declined though the village has not returned any population from 11 to nil. The population found in 1931 throughout the period 1n l-l971. comprised persons engaged in excavation of the Visweswaraya canal and is deemed tran­ Nil sient. 56

T Transient 1. Chik ka pu rakanahalli 1371 (8) Villr;ges i'1 which the pOl')l]lation found dUring one or more (,f tb~ ten cenS'l,CS ending with the 1961 The following tlhle 'how~ th,c number ('(villages census is deem;;o to b~ve comprised transients, abandoned bdore 1871 and during each of the hav,ng regard t'l t.he ab,ence (,f village sites and decades from 1871 to i 971, the population pattern.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 11)21 1931 1941 1951 1%1 1871 188 ; 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 1 1 ------'-'--'

NAGAMANGALA TALUK Decade of abandonment Total number of uninhabited villages in 19 i' 1 ... 28 1. Devara Hosur 1961 (21) 1901 Of these number having village site ... 6 (10) 1891 (40) I8S1 (40) 1871 (42) 1891-1901 N-Ncver Inhabited (See note (a) ) Villages which 11ad not been inhabited at any time 2. Gowdarnhalli 1g71 (23) !871-1881 during the past 150 year:; as evidencecl by their 3. Hosahalli 1911 (9) 1901 (14) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- lU91 (17) :871 (321 1911-1921 1'J7 i and by the absence of village site. (Sec !late (b) ) I. Byadagere 4. Katakaballi 1921 (21) 1911 2. Danaikanakote (31) 190 I (17) 1891 (23) I8n (30) 1871 (VI) 1921-1931 3. Gunjenahalli 4. Hasuvinakaval Forest NOTE: (a) Dev::tr.l Hosur is taken a<; abanLloncd during 5. Hiduva Kaval 1891-1901 wh':n its population declined 6. Honnavaradavalagel'e Kaval from 40 to 10. The popUlation found in 7. Hosakote 1961 is treated as transient. 8. Kagehosur (b) The decline in the population of Hosahalli 9. Kannanakere Kaval from 32 in 1871 to Nil in 1881 is ignorcd 10. Kelagere Kava! as the population became ] .;' in 1891. 11. Kaval 12. MugutlligunJi T-Transicllt 13. Nalnkunikere Kaval Villages in which the population found during one 14. Sanncnahalli or more of the tcn censuses e~ding with the 1961 15. Seegehosur census is deemed to have comprised transients, ; having regard to the absence of village sites and the j A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the population pattern. existence of village £ite indicating existence of an J. Abbagcre 1871 (69) established community sometime prior to 1871 even 2. Gundakalhosur 1941 (6) thOUg]l the village bas not returned any population 3. Honakerekavalu 1901 (4) throughout the period 1 g71· J 9 i J. 4. Kuchaha!li Kaval 1961 (18) 1911 (3) J. Doddenah:1l1i 5. MadahalliKaval1911 (6) 2. Pura 6. Mallekoppalu 1871 (43) 7. Mutsandra Kaval1941 (+7) 1911 (4). A II.A Village; having some Population at one or more of the ten ceflsmes ending with the 1961 The following t"b!e shows thc :llimbcr of villages census and also having a vilhtge site indicating the abandoned before 1871 and during celeh of the decades existence 0:' an estabiished commnnity. from 1871 to J971.

-, ---- -,-.------~--- Before 1871 ISSI 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 18S1 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 1 1 57

PANDAVAPURA TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 35 3. Duddaghatta 1911 (8) 1901 (3) Number for which information is not available .. . 1881 (29) 1871 (20) 1881-1891 (See note (a) ) (Ukkada separatcd from Kyathanahili village in 1931) 4. Dyavacap:itna 1891 (14) 1871 (51) 1871-1881 (Sec n',;tc (b) ) BaJance .. 34 5. Huligcre 1931 (7) 1921 (27) Number whose popuhltion was shifted due to 1911 (22) 1901 (12) 1891 (4) 1921-1931 1he inhabited ar..:a cc'ming under submersion 6. Mudanahalli 1931 (49) 1921 by the K.R.S. Reservoir ... 2 (63) 1911 (6l) 1901 (63) 1891 " K,~;lnaUlbadi & SwappanahalJi) (54) 1881 (43) 1871 (61) 1931-1941 7. Seeranahalli 1951 (59) 1941 N - NC'ier Inhabited (52) 1931 (30) 1921 (46) 1911 Villag(!s which had not been inhabited at any time (49) 1901 (33) 1891 (33) 1881 duri[,g the past 150 ye,Hs as evidenced by their (37) 1871 (20) 1951-1961 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 8. Thyavadahalli 1891 (20) 1881 (19) 1871 (16) 1891·1901 , 97 J and by the absence of village site. 1. Appcnahalli Kava! NOTE: (a) Duddnghatta is treated as abandoned bet­ 2. ;\ralakuppenah ween 1881 and 1891 when its population 3. Bittanayakanahalli declined from 29 to 3. 4. Heggadahalli (b) Dyavarapatna is treated as abandoned bet­ 5. K aggalipufil ween 1871 ahd 1881 when its population 6. .Malligere Kaval declined from 51 to 14 • 7. !vletekere 8. Molenahalli A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been 9. Mugur Koppal established settlements, having regard to the popu­ 10. Purusana }':_oppal lation pattern during the ten censuses ending with Il. Rangana Koppal 1961 census, even though there are no village sites. 12. Rangapura -Nil- 13. Settihalli Kaval 14. Chokanahalli T --Transient Villages in which the population found during one A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 existence of village site indicating existence of an census is deemed to have comprised transients, e,tabli,hed community sometime prior to 1371 even ha ving regard to the absence of village sites and though the \ Wage has not returned any population the population p:lttern. throughout the perioci 1871-1971. 1. Bindahalli Kaval 190 I (2) -Nil- 2. Dinkada Kaval 1901 (2) 3. Hosakop9alu 1901 (2(]) 1881 (6) 187l (52) A.B.A. Villages having some population at on.e or 4. Hosakotenala 1891 (6) more of the ten censuses ending with tl'e 1961 5. Kachanahalli 190 I (10) 1891 (9) cenSus and also huving a village site indicating the 6. Kanch:l11ahaIli 1911 (15l) 1891 (150) existence of all established commuaity. 7. Kannambadinala 1911 (7) 1901 (6) Decade of 8. Kattcrinala J90t (6) abandonment 1. il,jjamhalli 1941 (42) 1931 (67) 9. Koranahalli 1911 (20) 1901 (6) 1921 (71) 191 I (74) 1901l68) 10. Malisandra 1901 (19) 1891 (59) 1881 ~65) 1871 (70) 1941-1951 The following table shows the number of villages 2 Bccranahalli 190 I i 18) 1891 abandoned before 1871 and during each of the decades (39) 18~1 (29) 1871 (45) 1901-19 I 1 [rom l87l to 1971. ----_._------Before 1871 1881 11\91 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 J961 lim 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 19, I 1961 1971 I I I 58

SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 13 A.U.B. Villages which are deemed to have been Shifted on grounds of health established settlements, having regard to the popula­ (Makana Koppalu) ... 1 tion pattern during the ten censuses ending with Balance ... 12 1961 census, even though tbere are no village sites. Of these number having village site ... 3 1. Kalikoppalu 1901 (3) 1891 N- Never Inhabited (83) 1881 (52) 1871 (28) Villages which had not been inhabited at any time (See note Ccl) 1891-1901 during the past 15D years as evidenced by their remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- NOTE: (a) Balmuri is treated as abandoned between 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1901 and 1911 when its popUlation declined from 9 to nil. The popUlation returned in 1. Alagodu Kaval 1941 and lY6[ is treated as transient. 2. Nagaraghatta Kaval (b) Nagaraghatta is taken as abandoned between 3. Paramandahalli 1881 and 1891 when its population declined 4. Pura from 51 to niL The popUlation of 4 returned 5. Vittalapura in 1901 is treated as transient. (c) Kalikoppalu is treated as abandoned bet­ A.ll.A. Villages having some population at one or ween 1891 and 1901 when its population more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census declined from 83 to 3. and also having a village site indicating the existence of an established community. T- Transient Decade of Villages in which the popUlation found during one abandonment or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census is deemed to have comprised transients, hav­ Balmuri 1961 (38) 1. 1941 (1) ing regard to the absence of village site and the 1901 (9) 1891 (8) 1881 (16) popUlation pattern. 1871 (28) (See note (a) ) 1901-1911 1. Anagahalli 1931 (4) 2. Darnmanahalli 1931 (32) 1921 2. Jakkanakuppe 191} (20) (57) 1911 (53) 1901 (71) 1891 3. Kempalingapura 1901 (5) 18~1 (5) 1871 (83) (58) 1881 (53) 1871 (65) 193[-1941 3. Nagaraghatta 1901 (4) }881 The following table shows the number of villages (52) 1871 (42) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the (See note (b) ) 1881-1891 decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1.941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 191I 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 1 1 1 CHAPTER IX

MYSORE DISTRICT

CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 23 tion pattern during the ten censuses ending with Of these number having village site '" 4 1961 census, even though there are no village sites. 1. Somasamudra 1891 (41) 1881 N- Never Inhabited Villages which had not been inhabited at any time (28) 1871 (152) 1871-1881 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their NOTE: Somasamudra is treated as abandoned between remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1871 and 1881 when its popUlation declined from 1971 and by the absence of village site. 152 to 28. 1. Basthipura 2. Bettahalli T - Transient 3. Devarajapura Villages in which the population found during one 4. Hagalabele or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 5. Hangarepura census is deemed to have comprised transients, 6. Hosapura having regard to the absence of village sites and the 7. Kanchanahalli population pattern. 8. Madhuvinabeedu 9. Haraganapura ]. Chowdaballi 1911 (4) 10. Yelachagere 2. Hanumanapura 1891 (l05) II. District Forest I 3. Hosahalli 1961 (10) 1881 (20) A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 1871 (74) existence of village site indicating existence of an 4. Kumbargundi 1871 (32) established community sometime prior to 1871 even 5. Manganahalli 1921 (5) 1911 (5) though the village has not returned any population 6. Nanjahalli 18S1 (22) 1871 (80) throughout the period 1871-1971. 7. Punajar State Forest 1961 (51) 1. Shiudayyanapura 1951 (865) 1941 (1432) 1931 A.I1.A. Villages having some population at one or (979) 1921 (661) more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census and also having a village site indicating the existence NOTE: Punajar State Forest is a vast area of 63,000 of an established community. acres or nearly 100 Sq. miles. Soligas, one of the Decade of Scheduled Tribes in Mysore State were found in this abandonment area and in the adjoining Biligiri Rangan hills of I. 1941 (93) lQ31 (72) 1921 (71) 1911 (65) 1901 Yelandur Ta\uk. In the early fifties, an agricultural (69) 1891 (72) 1881 (91) 1871 colony for the settlement of these Soliga families (116) 1941-lLJ51 was formed near Budipadaga on the fringe of 2. Kethanapura 1891 (61) 1881 Punajar State Forest and the Soligas who were (40) 1,871 (78) 1891-1901 distributed all over the Punajar State Forest appear 3. Padnako duho sahalli 1911 to have shifted to the colony. (19) 1901 (47) 1891 (52) 1881 (49) 1871 (77) 1911-1921 The following table shows the number of villages A.I1.B. Villages which are deemed to have been abandoned before 1871 and during each of the established settlements, having regard to the popula- decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1~91 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 [891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 I 1 60

GUNDLUPET TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 28 existence of an establi ,hed community. Information not available ... 8 Decade of (Six are forests treated as forest villages for abandonment the first time in 1971 and two are not traced in Survey Records) 1. Ballahalli 1871 (18) 1871-1881 Balance .··20 2. Bhogganapura 189] (45) 1881 Of these number having village site ... 8 (40) 1.871 (50) 1891-1901 3. Hullana 1911 (22) 1901 (7) N-·Never Inhabited 1891 (14) 1881 (15) 1871 (34) ]911-1921 Villages which had not heen inhabited at any time 4. Kasavanur 1941 (6) 1931 (8) during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 1921 (17) 1911 (22) 1901 (42) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1891 (33) 1881 (34) 1871 (68) 1941-1951 1971 and by the absence of village site 5. Marihosabal1i 1931 (13) 1921 (2l) 1911 (18) 1901 (18) 1891 1. Chikanapura (16) 1881 (17) 1871 (18) 1931-1941 2. Parvathanapura 6. Masaballi 1931 (16) 1921 (35) 3. Siddapura 1911 (28) 1901 (/3) 1891 ,17) 4. Thalale 1881 (33) 1871 (72) 1931-1941 5. Thodipura 6. Vaddarahalli T --- Transient 7. Vasthilingapura Villages in which the pupulation found during one 8. Vodeyanapura Amani or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census is deemed to have comprised transients, A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the having regard to the absence of village sites and the existence of village site indicating existence of an population pattern. established community sometime prior to 1871 even though the village has not returned any population 1. Ameerhosahalli 1871 (64) throughout the period 1871-] 97 i. 2. Halladapura 1871 (59) 1. Alavady 3. Hanchipura 1911 (2) 1871 (16) 2. Devalapura. 4. Mayanaikanapura 1871 (2)

A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or The following table shows the number of villages more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 cen­ :!bandoned before 1871 und during eaC:1 of the sus and also having a village site indicating the dec~Ldes from 1871 to 1971.

--~------~------~---- -_ ----.. ------.. ----.------.. ------~------Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 193! 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 2 ------_._-_------~~------~------~-

HEGGADADEVANAKOTE TAl-UK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 197] ... 52 remaining uninhabited throughtout the period 1il71 Information not available 7 1971 and by the absence of village site. Shifted on account of submersion by Nugu 1. Antharasanthe Plantation Reservoir (lleggudilu) 2. Akkadevanahalli Balance ... 44 3. Alaganchi Of these number having village site '" 9 4. Ankanahalli 5. Dettadavarehundi N-Never Inhabited 6. Chikkundur Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 7. Hariyalapura (in the earlier Census Tabk3 tl.e during the past 150 years as evidenced by their name of this village is given as ) 61

8. Hirihalli A.I1.B. Villages which are deemed to have been esta­ 9. Horamarali blished settlements, having regard to the population 10. Hulikura Kaval pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 11. Iruvidhi census, even though there are no village sites. 12. Iyyanapura 13. Iyyanapura 1. 1911 (20) 1901 (17) 1871-1881 14. Kandegowdanapura 1891 (28) 1881 (52) 1871 (167) 15. :1vlasaniukppe (See note (e) ) 16. Mctikuppe Kaval 2. Konanalathur 1941 (17) 1931 17. Mugathana Moole (30) 1951 (54) 1911 (130) 1901 18. Nandinathapura (165) 1891 (260) 1881 (305) 19. Nandinathapura 1871 (280) 1941-1951 20. Ragalakuppe 3. Marabugathanapura 1891 (73) 21. Somegowdanahundi 1881 (95) 1871 (76) lS91-1901 22. Thenakallu NOTE: (a) Bettahalli is treated as abandoned between A.I. Abandoned prlor to 1871 as evidenced by the 1881 and 1891 when the population declined existence of village site indicating existence of an from 28 to O. As the Village had population estublished community sometime prior to 1871 even in 1911, 1921 and 1931 it is treated as aban­ though t:,e village has not returned any population doned again between 1931 and 1941- throughout the period 1871-1971. (b) Kalkodu is treated as abandoned between 1. Devalapura 1941 and 1951 when the population declined from 64 to 21. The earlier decline in popu­ A.B.A. Villages having some population at one or lation from 87 to 23 between 1891 and 1901 more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 cen­ is ignored as the population increased to 32 sus and also having a village site indicating the by 1931 and 64 by 1941- existence of an established community. (c) Sundapura is treated as abandoned between Decade of 1891 and 1901 when its population declined abandonment from 221 to 50. Though the village conti­ 1. Bettahalli 1931 (20) 1921 (45) nued to have some population upto 1951, it 1911 (29) ISSI (28) 1871 (82) 1881·1891 never exceeded 1/3 of the population in Abandoned for the second time 1891. between 1931 and 1941 (d) Kabbepura is treated as abandoned between (See note (a) ) 1871 and 1881 when thc population declined 2. Hyrapura 1871 (24) 1871-1881 from 29 to nil and the subsequent popula­ 3. Kalkodu 1951 (21) 1941 (64) tion in 1891 did not exceed 1/3 of the popu­ 1931 (32) 1921 (8) 1901 (23) lation in 1871. IS91 (87) 1881 (69) 1871 (128) 1891-1901 (e) Hunsur is treated as abandoned bctween (See note (b) ) 1871 and 1881 when its population declineJ 4. Sundapura 1951 (47) 1941 (22) from 167 to 52. Though the village conti­ 1931 (22) 1921 (47) 1911 (43) nued to be inhabited upto 1911, its popula­ 1901 (50) 1891 (221) 1881 tion never reached 1/3 of the population in (202) 1871 (169) 1891-1901 1871. (See note (c) ) 5. Thandasipura 1911 (17) 1901 T-Transient (48) 189[ (47) 1881 (81) 1871 Villages in which the population found during one (111) 1911-1921 or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 6. Thotahalli 1941 (27) 1141-1951 census is deemed to have comprised transient· 7. Kabbepura 1891 (8) 187! (29) 1871-1881 having regard to the absence of village sites and t' (See note (d) ) population pattern. 8. Badanekuppe 1921 (9) 1911 l (38) 1901 (72) 1891 (62) 1881 1. Amani Jungle 1951 (123) 1921 (7· ) (47) 1871 (42) 1911-1921 2. Ankupura 1881 (90) 1871 (95) 62

3. Chagathe Kuppe 1891 (17) 9. Vaderahalli 1871 (66) 4. Lakkur 1911 (16) 10. HlIrulipura 1961 (8) 5. Laxmanapura 1881 (32) 1871 (39) 6. Malalgadde 190 I (25) The following table shows the number of villages 7. Manegaranahundi 11171 (20) abandoned before ]871 and during each of the 8. Shanbugowdanahalli 1881 (26) decades from 1871 to 1971. ------_-- .------_._------Before l871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 I 3 1 3 2 2

HUNSUR TALUK Total number of uninhahited villages in 1971 ... 30 4. Modur Sonnenahalli Kava] Information not available ... 1 1941 (9) ]901 (14) 1901-1911 (See note (a) ) Balance ... 29 Of these number having village site ... .5 5 . Pinnikyathanahalli 1911 (47) 1901 (15) 1911-1921 N-Never Inhabited A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been esta­ Villages which had not been in habited at any time blished settlements, having regard to the population during the past 150 years as evidenced by their pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 remaining uninhabih:d throughout the period 1871- census, even though there are no village sites. 1971 and by the absence of village site. I. Thuppadakola 1901 (38) 1891 1. Basthi Madanahalli (53) 1881 (52) 1871 (32) 1901-1911 2. Bilikere Kaval 2. Uddurna!a ]941 (7) 1931 (6) 192] (6) ] 941-1951 2. Bommalapura Govindanahalli Nala 4. NOTE: (a) Modur Sonnenahal1i Kaval is treated as Halebeedu Kaval 5. abandoned between 1901 and 1911 when its 6. Hanumanthapura Nala popUlation declined from 14 to Nil '1 he 7. Hussainpuradanala popUlation returned in ]941 is treated as 8. Hussainpurakaval transient. 9. Kallahalli Kaval 10. Kattamalalavadinala T - Transient 11. Lalanakere Villages in which the popUlation found during one 12. Pare Koppalu or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 13. Settihalli census is deemed to have comprised transients, having regard to the absence of village sites and the A.IlA. Villages having some population at one or population pattern. more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 cen­ 1. Chilkunda Kava! 1961 (210) sus and also having a village site indicating the 2. Doddahejjur Kaval 1931 (4) existence of an established community. 3. Kurubarahosaha1li 1%1 (94) 1931 (3) ]881 (33) Decade of 4. Lakkur 1901 (1) abandonment 5. Nallurnala 1921 (2) l. Baltur 1941 (58) 1931 (78) 6. Thip pur Kaval 1951 (18) 1921 (72) 1911 (158) 190) 7. Veerana Hosaha!li Jungle 1931 (1) (IS2) 1891 (173) 1881 (147) 8. Hanagodunala 1961 (105) 1871 (137) 1941-1951 9. Madahalli 1961 (40) 2. Hulaganahal1i 1931 (47) 1921 (102) 1911 (82) 1901 (80) 1891 The following table shows the number of villages (83) 1881 (79) 1871 (134) 1931-1941 abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 3. Madapura 1881 (22) 1.871 (62) 1881-1891 decades from 1871 to 1971. ------_. ------Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 J921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 2 2 63

KRISHNARAJANAGAR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 30 3. Chenga 190[ (93) 1901-19 II Information not availab!e 4. Hanasoge Hantha 1951 (5) Balance 29 1931 (3) 1921 (4) 1911 ('i) Of these number having village site ... 7 1901 (2) 1951-1961 (See note (a) ) N- Never Inhabited 5. Katnal Hantha 1891 (418) Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 1881 (366) 1871 (458) 1891-190 I during tbe past 150 years as evidenced by tbeir (See note (b) ) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 6. Kuchanahalli 1931 (32) 1921 1971 and by the absence of village site. (54) 1931-1941 Kava] 1- A.n.B. Villages which are deemed to have been 2. Bakkarehallada Kaval established settlements, having regard to the popula­ 3. Bannikuppe tion pattern during the ten censuses ending with 4. Beeranahalli 1£.,'61 census, even though there are no village sites. 5. Bettahalli Kaval 6. nyadarahalli Hanta ]. Bachahalli 1911 (208) 1901 7. Hebbal Kayal (263) 1891 (271) 1881 (L 97) 8. Hullebore Kaval J 871 (237) 1911-1921 9. Hul!ehosur 2. Kuppe Hantta 1961 (67) 1951 10. Huru Ii Kamenahalli (3) 1941 (7) 1931 (27) 1921 (2) 11. Matada Kaval 1911 (I) 1901 (10) 1891 (3) 1961-1971 12. Mavathur Hantha (See note (c) ) 13. Venkatapura 3. Manuganahalli 1931 (4) 1891 A.I. Abandoned prio, to 1871 as evidenced by the (55) 1881 (38) 1871 (33) 1891-1901 existence of village site indicating existence of an (See note (d) ) established community sometime prior to 1871 even though the village has not returned any population NOTE: (a) Hanasoge Hantha is treated as abandoned throughout the period 1871-1971. between 1951 and 1961 ignoring the depopu­ lation between 1931 and 1941 in view oftbe 1. Valagerehaili population in 1951 exceeding the population A.B.A. Villages having some popUlation at one or in 1931. more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 cen­ sus and also having a village site indicating tbe (b) The population shown against Katnal existence of an established community. Hantha for 1891, 188l and 1871 in tbe Decade of consolidated village popUlation tables for the period :871-191 [ appears to relate to abandonment I. Alalakuppe 1911 (31) 1901 Katnal. This vie ,v gains support from the (21) 1891 (32) 1881 (2(1) 1871 following Table showing the population of (39) 1911-1921 Katnal and Katna1 Hantha from J 871 to 2. Chandagal Hantha 19tH (12) 1901-19! 1 1971.

1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 Katnal 362 155 319 239 208 165 236 330 Katnal Hantha 458 366 418

(c) Kuppe Hantha is treated as abandoned bet­ declined from 55 to nil. The popUlation of ween 1961 and 1971 ignoring the decline in 4 returned in 1931 is deemed transient. popUlation from 27 to 7 between 1931 and 1941 and also the earlier decline from 10 to T - Transient I between 1901 and 191 I. Villages in which the population found during one Cd) Manuganahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ or more of tbe ten censuses ending with the 1961 ween 1891 and 1901 when its population census is deemed to have comprised transients, 64

having regard to the absence or village sit::s and the 5. Mallahalli 1871 (18) population pattern. 6. Vallambudi 1891 (21) 1871 (43) 1. Buvanahalli! 921 (53) 2. Hadva Hantha 1921 (4) The following table shows the number of villages 3. Kappadi Hanta 1901 (175) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 4. Kolur Banta 1911 (106) decades from 1 S71 to 1971.

_------,-~~.-~ .t:efOle 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 2 2 ]

------~---~-~-.------~

l\lY SOFE TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 18 A.II.G. Villages which are deemed to have been Merged in urban area (M) established settlements, having regard to the popula· (Residential portion of Maragowdanahalli tion pattern during the ten censmes ending with merged in Mysore City Municipality) ... I 1961 census. even though there are no viilage sites. Popu!2.tion Shifted (S) (Due to submersion of residential portion of 1. Lingambudhi 1961 (12) 1951 Cholenahalli under K.R.S. Reservoir) 1 (13) 1941 (15) 1891 (I) 1881 Of these number having village site 3 (I) 1871 (48) 1871·1881 (See note (c) ) N-- Never Inbabited Abandoned a second time Villages which had not been inhabited at any time cetwcen 1961 & 1971 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 2. Madapura 1891 (20) 1881 (58) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871. 1871 (28) 1891-1901 1971 and by the absence of village site.

NOTE: (a) Hongate is treated as abandoned between 1. Aragowdanahalii 2. 1871 and 1881 when its popUlation declined Ayyajayyanahundi from 40 to 3. . ~ J. Cbandrabidu 4. Chikkakaturu (b) Malalavadi is treated as abandoned between 5. Halalu 1901 and 1911 When its popUlation declined 6. Kemmanapura from 44 to nil As there W:1S 110 population '"1 upto 1951, the popubtion returned in J951 I. KUlltanahalli and 1961 is deemed transient. A.B.A. Villages having some population at one or (c) Lingambudi is treated as abandoned bet­ more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census ween 1871 and 18" 1 when its population and also having a village site indicating the existence declined from Li8 to 1. As the vjliage was of an establis:,ed community. populated during 1941, 1951 and 1961 it is Deeade of treated as abandoned a second time between 1961 and 1971. abandonment I. Hongate 1891 (2) 1881 (3) T -- Transier.t 1871 (40) 1871·1881 (See note (a) ) Villages in which the popUlation fOllnd during one Ol more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 2. Joganahalli 1901 (32) 1891 census is deemed to have comprised transients, hav. (30) 1881 (59) 1871 (87) 1901·1911 ing regard to the absence of village sites and the 3. Malalavadi 1961 (33) 1951 population pattern. (53) 1901 (44) 1891 (62) 1881 (79) 1871 (l81) 1901·1911 1. Hunnavalli 1921 (8) 1911 (42) (See note (b) ) 2 Javanahalli 1881 (42) 1771 (50) 65

3. Kallur Naganahalli Kaval The following table shows the number of villages 1961 (24) 1911 (38) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 4. Nanagalli 1881 (10) 1871 (13) decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 2 1

NANJANGUD TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 197 L .•• 20 1911 (224) 1901 (208) Of these number having village site ... 5 1891 (273) 1881 (238) 1871 (326) 1961-1971 'N-Never Inhabited 4. Hosapura 1911 (60) 1901 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time (1950) 1891 (76) 1881 (66) , during the past 150 years as evidenced by their re­ 1871 (106) maining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- [See note (a)] 1911-1921 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1. Gadiguddadakaval A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been esta­ 2. Hosaveedu Kava1 blished settlements, haVing regard to the popula­ 3. Kanteerayanapurada Kaval tion pattern during the ten censuses ending with 4. Karahatti Kaval 1961 census, even though there are no village sites. 5. Kongahalli Kaval 1. Katadcvanahalli 1901 (11) 6. Tumnerale Kaval 1891 (24) 1881 (26) 1871 (92) 1871-1881 7. Melagahalli [See note (b)] 8. Rayagowdanahalli 9. SathagahaJli NOTE (a) The decline in the population of Hosapura from 1950 in 1901 to 60 in 1911 is ignored A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the as the population returned in 1901 appears existence of village site indicating existence of an to have comprised mostly transients. established community sometime prior to IS71 even (b) Katadevanahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ though the village has not returned any population ween 1871 and 1881 when its population thrJughout the period 1871-1971. declined from 92 to 26.

1. Karlapura T-Transient Villages in which the population found during one A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census is deemed to have comprised transients, census and also having a village site indicating the having regard to the absence of village site and the existence of an established community. population pattern. Decade of l. Chamana Madanahalli I87L (6) abandonment 2. Kallahalli 1961 (15) 1941 (13) 1. Chikkayyanachatra 1941 (135) 3. Paduvala Agrahara 1881 (5) 1931 (I 00) 1921 (128) 1911 4. Ramasettipura 1871 (114) (119) 1901 (140) 1891 (274) 5. Thelanur 1901 (8) 1881 (222) 1871 (269) 194L-1951 2. Kanipura 1871 (38) 1871-188J The following table shows the number of villages 3. Uganeya 1961 (121) 1951 (114) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the de­ 1941 (163) 1931 (L83) 1921 (233) cades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 66

PEJUVAPATNA TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 14 A.lI.B Villages which are deemed to eav.e hgen esta­ Of these number having viHage site ... 5 blished settlements, having regard to the population pattern during the ten censuses ending With 1'961 N-Never Inhabited Census even through there are village nosites. Villages whieh had not been inhabited at any time 1. Hegathur 1961 (23) 1921 (23) during the past ISO years as evidenced by their re­ 1911 (70) 1901 (118) 1891 maining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- (56) 1881 (87) 1871 (82) 1911-1921 197 I and by the absence of village site. [See note (c)] I. A varekaiguddakaval 2. Charapura NOTE: (a) Chowkur is treated as aband'Oned between 3. Gobbali Kava! 1951 and 19(il when the popuiatiUn declined . 4. Lingapura Forest from 50 to 16 ignoring the Lie91.in.c in POPll­ lation from 101 in 1931 to N41 ill 1941.ajI the A.I. Abondoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the exi­ population in 1951 was more tl1an 113 the stance of village site indicating existence of an esta­ population in 1931. blished community sometime prior to 1871 even though the vlllag,! has not returned any population (b) Lingapura is trea(~d ,~s abond0~ between throu~hout the period 1871-! 971. 193 1 and 1941 when the population cieolined I. Bettadakaval from 97 to 11. The depopulauPn hetwcen 2. Kachuvana'haHi Juogle 1901 an d 1911 is ignor~ as the -!Wulation in 1921 exceeds the population ill 190,1. A.II.A Villages having some population at one or more (c) Hegathur is treated a~ .abaiu:lO®G tJetween of tke ten censuses ending with tbe 1961 census and 1911 and 1921 whenClbe~di.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 19,51 196J 1971 2 1

THIRUMAKUPLU NARASIJ>UR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 9 maining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- Of these number having village site ... 3 1971 and by the ameflce of viHage site. 1. Jodihonnur N~Never Inhabited 2. Uddibagore Villages which had not been inhabited at any time during the past 150 years as evidenced by their re- A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidcllced.bythe..eMs- 67

tence of village site indicating existence of an esta­ (244) 189l (270) 1881 (203) blished community sometime prior to 1871 even 1871 (201) 1961-1971 though the village has not returned any popUlation 3. Pileahalli 1921 (28) 1911 (41) 1901 (52) 1891 throughout the period 187 I -1 'J71. (66) 1881 (58) 1871 (95) 1921-1931

Nil T -Transient Villages in which the population found during one A.II.A. Villages having some popUlation at one or or more of the ten censuses' ending with tne 0)61 more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census is deemed to have comprised transients, census and also' having a village site indicating the having regard to the absence of village sites and the existence ofan estaBlished community. population pattern. Decade of 1. Channanjavadayanapura 1871 (59) abandonment 2. DoddaJaxmipura 188] (10) 18'71 (14') 1. Halvara Mutl:a 1921(4) 1911 3. Jodibagore 1871 (3) (8) 1961 (4) 1921-1931 4. Settihalli 1871 (3) 2. Patte Hurldi 11961 (394) 1951 The following table shows the number of villages (386) 1"94'1' (346) 1931 (349) abondoned before 187 [ and during each of the de­ 1921 (276) 1911 (357) 1901 cades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 18S1 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 19S1 1,961 1971 2

YELANDUR TALUK

16t'al nUnloir of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 1 :O~ade of ~bando~ment X.tt.A Villages liaving some population at one or more 1. Devarahalli 1951 (17) 1941 (85) 1931 (31) 1921 (37) 1911 of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census and (3(:) 1901 (37) 1941-1951 a'~'1iaViIi~ a viliage site indicating the existence of Nom: This viHage is treated as' abandoned between an 6ma'lSlis'ltM comIiiunity. 1941 and 1951 when its population declined from 85 to 17. CHAPTER X

SHTMOGA DISTRICT

BHADRAVATHI TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 18 4. Hagalamane 1951 (8) 1931 Of these number having village site ... 10 (33) 1911 (44) 1901 (46) 1891 (54) 1881 (82) 1931-41 N-Never Inhabited [See note (b)] Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 5. Jangamanahalli 1871 (20) 1871-1881 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 6. Koppadahalu 1911 (28) 1901 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- (54) 1891 (68) 1881 (63) 1871 (152) 1911-1921 1971 and by the absence of village site. 7. SiddarahaIli 1911 (89) 1901 1. Halumallapura (152) 1891 (245) 1881 (253) 2. Harogundi 1871 (301) 1911-1921 3. Kottadahalu 8. Somenakoppa 194 I (10) 1931 4. Malalaharavu (17) 1921 (19) 1911 (32) 1901 (14) 1891 (12) 1881 (14) 1871 5. Navile Basavapura (15) 1941-1951 6. Varavinakere. 9. Vadeyur 1941 (44) 1931 (100) 1921 (l06) 1911 (147) 1901 A.I. Abandond prior to 187 I as evidenced by the exis­ (127) 1891 (116) 1881 (84) tence of village site indicating existence of an 1871 (32) 1941-1951 established community sometime prior to 1871 even NOTE : (a) Guninarsapura is taken as abandoned bet­ though the village has not returned any population throughout the period 1871·1971. ween 1911 and 1921 when its population declined from 44 to nil. The population of 1. Tarika tte 3 returned in 1931 was far less tban one third tbe population in 1911. A.I1.A. Villages having some population at one or (b) Hagalamane is treated as abandoned between more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 1931 and 1941 when its population declined census and also havIDg a village site indicating the from 33 to nil The population of 8 returned existence of an established community. in 1951 was less than one third the popUla­ Decade of tion in 1931. abandonment 1. Bhadrapura 1901 (46) 1891 T-Transient (69) 1881 (103) 1871 (124) 1901-1911 Villages in which the popUlation found during one or more of the ten censuses ending with tbe 1961 2. Bommanakatte 1961 (70) 1871 (19) 1961-1971 census is deemed to have comprised transients, having regard to tbe absence of viIJage sites and the Guninarasipura 1931 (3) 1911 3. population pattern. (44) 1901 (84) 1891 (81) 1881 1. Hosur 1961 (36) (95) 1871 (109) 1911-1921 2. Nagoli 1881 (2) (Tbere is a note that in 1941 this village was included in The following table shows the number of villages ) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the [See note (a)] decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1891 190] 1871 1881 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 1 3 1 2 1 69

ClIANNAGIRI TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 55 6. Chikkamalali 1961 (4) 1951 Information not available ... 12 (312) 1891 (30) 1881 (44) 1871 Balance ... 43 \65) 1891-1901 [(See note (c)] Of these number of villages having village sites ... 29 7. Doddamalai 1961 (8) 1891 N-Never Inhabited (48) 1881 (128) 1871 (45) 1891-1901 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time [See note (d)] during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 8. Durgadahasavapura 1871 (37) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1871-]881 1971 and by the absence of village site. 9. Garagadakatte 1891 (48) 1871 l. Byrapura (83) ]891-190] 2. DasarahosahalIi [See note (e) 1 3. Kabalikatte 10. HakkipalIi 1911 (229) 1901 4. Linganagathihalli AM Kaval (177) 1891 (156) 1881 (141) 5. Mandaganahalu 1871 (143) 1911-1921 6. Nagenahalli 11. Kalkere 1921 (24) 1901 (44) 7. Sivagangenahal 1871 (41) 8. Vylipura 1871-1881 [See note (f)] A I. Abandoned prior to 1&71 as evidenced by the exis­ 12. Kallenahalli 1941 (24) 1931 tence of village site indicating the existence of an (41) 1921 (65) 1911 (44) 1901 established community sometime prior to 1871 even (71) 1891 (66) 1981 (50) 1871 though the village has not returned any population (64) 1941 -]951 throughout the period 1871-1971. 13. Kallenahalli 1941 (34) 1931 ]. Kudligere (205) 1921 (86) 1911 (70) 2. Pillanakatte 1901 (50) 1891 (38) 1881 (41) 1871 (61) ]941-]951 A.II.A. Villages having some population at one Or [See not (g)] more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census ]4. Karkikere 1941 (40) 1931 and also having a village site indicating the exis­ (102) 1921 (48) 1911 (90) tence of an established community. 1901 (88) 1891 (106) 1881 Decade of (91) 1971 (78) 1941-1951 abandonment 1. Akalikatte 1941 (114) 1931 15. Kamanahalli 1891 (45) 1871 (53) (161) 1921 (131) 1911 (167) 1891-]901 1901 (115) 1891 (82) 1881 16. K. Basavanahalli ]961 (5) (34) 1871 (29) 1941-1951 1901 (169) 1881 (66) 1871 2. Attighatta 1921 (80) 1911 (144) (123) ]901-1911 1901 (114) 1891 (l79) 1881 [See note (h)] (248) 1871 (216) 1921-1931 17. Kulumenahalli 1961 (413) 3. Avalaghatta 1911 (92) 1901 1901 (70) 1891 (82) 1881 (68) 1901-1911 (69) 1911-i921 [See note (i)] 4. Belavanthanahalli 1941 (43) 18. Machanaikanahalli Kaval 1921 (99) 1911 (111) 1901 (6U) 1941 (74) 1931 (369) 192] 1891 (47) 1881 (51) 1871 (50) 1941-1951 (288) 1911 (295) 1931-1941 [See note (a)] [See note (j)]

5. Bullanaikanahalli 1921 (22) ]9. Mangenahalli 1871 (68) 1871-1881 1911 (37) 1901 (152) 1891 20. Megyathanahalli ]921 (114) (144) 1881 (295) 1871 (438) 1901-1911 1911 (183) 190] (219) 1891 [See note (b)] (192) 1881 (126) 1871 (192) 1921-1931 70

2l. Narasipura 1871 (31) 1871-1881 from 41 to nil. Tire popalation r~ in 22. Pandogere 1941 (39) 1931 1901 and 192 I is treated as transient. (58) 1921 (72) 1911 (Itt6)" (g) KatfenahalIi is tteared as aban'dortecf bet­ 1901 (193)' 1891 (226) r881 ween 194 I and IIlSl, tre',}fiug~' ptlptffation (tm 1871 (318) of 205 returned in 1931 as comprising tran­ 23, Ramasagara 1951 (75) 1941 sients mostly, (49) 187t (IOO) 1871-1881 (h) K. Basavanahalli is treated as abandoned tsee no te (k)]' between 190 I and 1911 when it's poputatmn 24. Rampura 1911 (181) 1911-1921 d6clinlKl from 1'69 to nil. The population ~; R 19tH' (51) 1891 declined from 100 to nil. The POpWation '('85) 1881 (71) 1871 (168) 1901-19II returned in 194 I amI WS 1 i$ tf'Oatod as tmnsient. NOTE: (a) Belavanthananillli is taken as a'ban'(toned (I) Rangapllta is treated as abando.ood botween between 1'941 an'd 1951 ignoring the de­ 1871 and 1881 when its popula,tiolf declined population between 1'921 and 1931 as the from 167 to nil and the village waif det>opu­ population in 194 I was m'ore than one third lated in 1891 also. The popUlation returned the population in 1921. in' 190:1' is troatoo as tl'anllic:mt. (b) BuJlanlliKanhalJi is taken all afia'lhloned' bet­ ('m) Sa vehlldlu' is' treateli ,as aba&d0Do& bot'ween ween'l'90 1 aM l!>H wften its 'I'opulation 1~71 :rod I~l wJ3ien its'~iaoOOtt _lined declined rrc:Wn f52 t6 37. from' 115 ro nil. The fpopuAatiOO, f'ettlrned c) ChikkamalaJi is trelited as abandoned bet­ iii' 1931 is treated as transient. ween' Ilg91' iind 1'01 Wlteb,:its population T -Transient declined from 30 to nil, Tlie population retul'Bed in 1951, 'and 1961 is treated as Villages in wtIiCh,the population f0und euring one or more of Ute ten census c8diag with the 1961 tran~ll11t. OdIisus is deemed to have comprised >transients. ~) Doddama1ali is treated as ~al1doned bet­ having regard to the absence of village sites and the ween 1891 and 19(}1 wl!en'its'population population pattern. declined from 48 to nil. The population 1. Hanumalapura 1891 (2) returned, in 196'1, is treated as transient. 2. Hanumanahalu 1891 (n) (e) Garagadakatte is treated as abandoned bet­ 3. Kukwada 1961 (33) 1~2!J (-20) 18'71{3} ween 1891 and 1901 ignoring the depopu­ 4. N!:ohidinpura 1961 (60) 1931 (48) lation between 1('71 and 1lg's'I', :ts' the popu­ 5. ShivapulAAlahal ,State 'For.ost 190.1 .(2), lation in 189'1 was'itiote'tIian oIfe third the population in 181'1. 'fhtl,following table sh6Wt the nUlIibGt of vi.Jages (f) Kalkere is treated as aban

HONNAU IfALUK

1if.9.ta1 nu.mber lof uuinhlfbited villages:in -19171 .••• 27 7. Hunasehalli 1931 (93) 19QI llQtbrmatiim nat !VIailatJle ••• 4 (11) 1871 (97) 1871-1881 Balance ..•. 23 [See note (b) Of these number having village site ... 16 8. Isara_pura 19.31 (14) 1921 (17) 1911 (14) 1901 (18~ !1891 (33} 14)81 (144) . N--d\l'ever Inhabited 1871 (20{) 1881·1~1 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time [See not (c)] tfuring-the-past 159 years as evidenced by their -re­ 9. - 1941 (4l) 19ztf~f~1 maining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 10. Malledevarakatte 1871 (44) 1871·1881 1971 and by the absence of village site, 11. Maragondanahalli 1931 (1) l. Boodihalli 1921 (18) 1911 (334) 1911-1921 2. 1a]tkattp [See DOte (d)] 3. KallU'katte 12. Savagondanahaifi 1'88'1 (~ '1"114'89I n. Yallapura 1931 (19) 1921 ('81) A.I AbatlPoned prioTto 1871 as evidenced by the exis­ 1911 (l00) 1901 (73) 1891 (65) t~!lce of village site indicating existence of an esta­ 1881 (159) 1871 (87) 1"921-1'9.31 bliib.e.d community sometime prior to 1871 even [See not (e)] though the village has 110t returned any population A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have bee,n c;sta­ .tbr.ol.lt.t.laeperiod 1871·1971- blished settlements, having regard toJhe PQpu­ .). lAetw~UTa lation pattern during the ten censuses e~ing '2. AkIlaatllangem' K:atfie with 1961 census. eVen though there ,ate no 3. BGmmeoabaUi village sites. 1. Goravarakatte 1931 (17) 1911 A.D.,.A. Village having some population at cme or more (36) }901 ,46).j891 (m 1881 of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census and (71) 1871W). 193H 941 .,also.ha\'illB.a village site indicating the existence of 2. Natagiaa.t.e1!e 1,-9,0 lin) 18.91 ,ltD ~t'&bJisbed cO:G:ununity. (33) 1881 £iJ).i871 ~2) 19D1tW, 11 D~aae.m abandonment NOTE: (a) Gundichattanahalli is taken as abandoned J. 1941 (31) 1931 between 190 1 and 19l1 when -its p~ation (7) 1921 (12) 1941-1951 declined from 9J to 26. The depopulatien (figures not available for the between 1871 and 1881 iis ignored as die earlier censuses) popUlation in 1391 exceeded one thir4 of 2. Arekatte 1911 (126) 1901 (190) the population in 1871. 1891 (149) 1881 (191) 1871 (b) Hunsehalli is taken as abandoned between (205) 1911-1921 1871 and 1881 when its PQPuiatioD; .•':~ from 97 to nil. The popUlation returned in 3. Chikkathinahalli 1931 (38) 1921 19.@1 ..and t931 js~ted,as tI~iQDt. (36) 1911 (70) 1901 (76) 1891 (149) 1.s81 (97) 187! (96) 1931-1941 (c) Isatapura is· taken as abando:uCl

censUs is deemed to have comprised transients. 2. Tirtharampura 1911 (I) 1901 (I) 1881 (3) having regard to the absence of village sites and the population pattern. The following table shows the number of villages abandoned before 1871 and during each of the de­ I. Hanumapura 1921 (17) cades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 1

HOSANAGAR TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 9 A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or Shifted on account of submersion by Shara- more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 vati Hydel Project ... 6 census and also having a village site indicating the l. Adagalale existence of an established community. 2. Churda Decade of 3. Hogatoor abandonment 4. Hosakote 1. Kalase 1881 (3) 1881-1891 S. Kanagodu A.I1.B. Villages which are deemed to have been esta­ 6. Kudavari blished settlements,having regard to the population Balance ... 3 pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 Of these number having village sites ... 1 census, even though there are no village sites. 1. Amachi 1961 (19) 1951 (4) N-Never Inhabited 1921 (10) 1901 (1l) 1891 (12) Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 188l (8) 1871 (16) 1961-1971 during the past 150 :years as evidenced by their re­ maining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- The following table shows the number of villages 1971 and by the absence of village site. abandoned before 1871 and during each of the de­ I. Kilandur Jungle. cades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1S;01 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971

SAGARA TAL UK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 35 3. Thagarthi Swasti Number of villages submerged under Shara- vati Hydel Project (come under S) ... 25 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the exis­ tence of village site indicating existenced of an esta­ Balance ... 10 blished community sometime prior to 1871 even Of these number having village site .. , 2 though the village has not returned any population throughout the period 1871-1971. N-Never Inhabited Villages which had not been inhabited at any time during the past 150 years as evidenced by their Nil remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1971 and by the absence of village site. A.I1.A Villages having some population at one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census and 1. Gouza Swasti also having a village sIte indicating the existence of 2. Nadahalli Kai an established community. 73

Decade of declined from 859 to nil. The population abandonment returned in 1~31 is treated as transient. 1. Analekoppa 1951 (96) 1941 T-Transient (71) 1931 (30) 1921 (15) 1911 VilJages in which the population found during one (15) 1901 (27) 1891 (28) 1881 or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 (28) J 871 (688) 1871-1881 Census is deemed to have comprised transients, [See note (a)] having regard to the absence of village sites and the 2. Koppalagadde 1901 (4) 1891 population pattern. (39) 1881 (89) 1871 (79) 1891-\901 Nil [See note (b)] S-Shifted A.n.B. Villages which are deemed to have been asta­ Villages which have become uninhabited on account blished settlements, having regard to the population of the shifting of the population by Government pattern during the ten cenSUses ending with 1961 action due to submersion of the residential area by census, eVen though there are no village sites. construction of irrigation and/or hydel projects or l. Gouza Sarkari 1911 (536) on health grounds. 1901 (,n3) 1891 (591) 1881 1. Angalakoppa (536) 1871 (637) 1911-1921 2. Brahmanagudigere 2. Hedathari 1961 (377) 1951 3. Brahmanamadavu (238) 1941 (199) 1931 (171) 4. Brahmanamalla 1921 (231) 1911 (153) 1901 5. Hamse (I 53) 1891 (227) 1881 (161) 6. Haraduri 1871 (226) 1961-1971 7. Harogoppa 8. Hebbailu become inaccevible after Sharavati Hydel 9. Hebburu Project. 10. Heggasaru 3. Sarkari 1911 (321) 11. Henagere 1901 (335) 1891 (<147) 1881 12. Herakere (395) 1871 (380) 1911-1921 13. Herasalige 4. Thagarthi Sarakari 1931 (24) 14. Hirebhaskar 1911 (859) 1901 (ISll) 1891 IS. IlIakodu (1223) 1881 (1179) 1871 (1231) 1911-1921 16. Keravadi [See note (c)] 17. Madaduru S. Uralagallu 1921 (78) 1911 18. (33) 1901 (115) 1891 (117) t9. Mathiga 1881 (139) 1871 (168) 1921-1931 20. Nadailakalale NOTE: (a) Analekoppa is taken as abandoned between 21. Nadamadavu 1871 and 1881 when its population declined 22. Shenige from 688 to 2il. 23. Sirigalale (b) Koppalagadde is taken as abandoned bet­ 2:1.. Sulagalale ween 1891 and 1901 when its popUlation 25. Yelava declined from 39 to 4. The following table shows the number of villages (c) Thagarthi Sarkari is taken as abandoned abandoned before 11;71 and during each of the de­ between 1911 and 1921 when its population cades from Us7! to 1971. Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1551 1961 1871 1881 18~1I 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 I 3 1

SHIKARIPUR TALUK Total number of uninhabited Villages in 1971 ... 34 dllring the past 150 years as evidenced by their Of these numbe having village site ... 20 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1971 and by the absence of village site. N-.[\'ever Inhabited Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 1. Anjanapura 74

2. Gungaragatte 11. Mayascttikoppa 1961 (17) 3. Kambadoor 1951 (17) 1941 (19) 1931 (62) 4. Kadagadalcere 1921 (50) 1911 (69) 1901 (68) 5. Markande 1891 (82) 1881 (87) 1871 6. Puradalu (115) 1931-1941 7. Rampura [See note (c) J 8. Sidiganahalu 12. Sanyasikoppa 1941 (8) J 871 9. Suth~kande (6) 1941·1951 10. Ujjanipura 13. Sarakari Muthalli 1911 (360) 11. Voderal'llTa 190] (294) 1~91 (280) 1881 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as eviuenced by the (270) IR71 (250) [91J-1921 existence of village site ind :c.ltillg existence of an 14. Seelavanthanakoppa 1921 (32) established community sometime prior to 1871 even 1911 (3) 1901 (6) 1891 (47) though the village has 110t relurned any p:>pulation 1881 (168) 1871 (98) 1881-1891 throughout the period 1871-1971. [See note (f)] J, Basavapura 15. Thandagunda 1891 (35) 1891-1901 A II.A. Villages Inving some population at one or 16. Thirthalmlli 1871 (39) 1871-1881 more of the ten censme; ending with the 1961 17. Uttaranihalli 1931 (5) 1921 census and also having a vi.! :ge site indicating the (54) 1911 (28) 1901 (183) existence of an established community. 1891 (87) 1881 (114) 1871 Decade of (J 00) 1901-1911 abandonment [See note (g)J 1. Anaginabylu 1911 (26) 1891 18. Vadagatte 1931 (7) 1921 (15) (30) 1881 (20) 1911-1921 19[1 (58) 1901 (36) 1891 (57) [See note (a)] 1881 (55) 187! (77) 1911-1921 2. Bhadrapura 1871 (42) 1871-1881 [See note (h)] 3. Bhaktanakoppa 1941 (11) 19. Virupapura 1901 (67) 189! 1911 (72) 1901 (149) 189! (52) 1881 (55) 1871 (67) 1901-1911 (146) 1881 (19~) 187[ (179) 1911-1921 [See note (b)] A.U.n. Villages which are deemed to have been esta­ 4. Chikka Koralahalli 1931 (251 blished settlements, having regard to the population 1921 (19) 1871 (34) 1931-1941 pattcm during the ten censuses ending with 1961 5. Hakkli 1911 (42) 1901 (101) census. even though there are no village sites. 1891 (74) 1881 (129) 187] (89) 1911·1921 1. Bhogasamudra 1881 (124) 1881-1891 6. Harigehalu 1931 (3) 1881 (12) 2. Sarkari Agrahara muchadi 187 [ (78) 1871·1881 191\ (653) 1901 (6'19) 1891 [See note (c)] (638) 1881 (602) 1871 (566) 1911-1921 7. Honnakanakoppa 190 1 (C [) NOTE: (a) Anaginabylu is taken as abandoned between 189! (84) 1881 (113) 1871 J 911 and 192! when its population declined (110) 1901-1911 from 26 to nil. The earlier depopulation 8. Kadathannali 1911 (24) 1901 between 1891 and 190 I is ignored as the (26) 1891 (42) 1881 (60) 1871 population in 1911 was nearly the same as (15) 1911-1921 in 189], 9. Kesaraghatta 1931 (104) 1921 (b) Bhaktanakoppa is taken as abandoned (87) 1911 (52) 1901 (128) 1891 between 1911 and 1921 when its popula­ (106) 1881 (10'1) IfI7l (81) 1931-1941 tion declined from 72 to nil. The popula­ 10. Madravalli 1941 (10) 1931 tion returned in 1941 is treated as transient. (86) 1921 (89) J911 (89) 1901 (c) Harigehalu is taken as abandoned between (93) 1891 (171) 11l8l (244) 1871 and 1881 when its population decli­ 1871 (252) ned from 78 to 12. The populatioB [See note (d)] , 1931-1941 returned in J931 is treated as transient. 75

(d) Madrava1li is taken as abandoned between 1911 and 1921 when its populatton decli 1931 and 1941 when its population dec­ ned from 58 to 15. lined from i:l6 to 10. T-Tnmsient (e) Mayaseitikoppa is taken as ah;mdoned Villages in which the population found during one betwern 1931 and 1941 when its popudion or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 declined from 62 to 19. census is deemed to have comprised transients, (f) Seelavantbanako ',pa is taken as abandoned having legal'd to the absence of village sites and the between 188 land 1891 when its ropula­ population pattern. tion declined from 163 to 47. I. Badalike 1881 (5) (g) Uttaranihalli is taken as abandoned bet­ ween 1')0 I and 1'J It when its p0p'llatio" The f0110wing table shows the number of villages declined from ItU to 28. "Dando led befcre 1 Eo 71 and during each of the (h) Vadagatte is taken as abandoned between dec

------.-- --_ --_ ------Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 19~1 1941 1951 1961 1971 3 2 I 3 7 4 . __------

SHIMOGA TAUJK

Total number of uninhabited villages h 1971 ,,35 3. llyranakoppa 1961 (26) 1921 Information not available ." 1 (2(1) 191 1(156) 1901 (37) Ib91 Balance '" 3 ~ (112) ISS] (119) 1871 (175) 1961-1971 Of these number having village site ... 20 [See nute (a)l

N-Never Inhabited 4. Choranaueba\li 1951 (137) Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 194] (10::) 1931 (122) 1921 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their (122) 19':;1 (145) 1911 (238) remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1901 (271) J891 (288) 1881 1971 and by the absence of village site. (211) 1871 (210) 1951-1961 I. Barathipa1beeranahaJli 5. Ecl18.vadi 1921 (9) 1881 (11) 2. Doddamarase 1871 (17) 1881-1891 3. Gollarakoppa [See note (b)] 4. Sakrebylu 6. GaligekoJa 1831 (18) 1871 5. Srigandada Kaval (14) 1881-1891 A.I:. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 7. Gopaseltipura 1911 (54) 1871 existence of viilage site indicating existence of an (6) 1911·1921 established community sometime prior to 1871 even though the village has not returned any population 8. Goravik:1tte 1891 (55) 1881 throughout the period 1871-1971. (75) 1871 (77) 1891-1901 I. Rosur 9. Israpura 1921 (17) 1901 (24) 2. Kandajji 18')1 (37) 1881 (62) 1871 (70) 192H931 A.II.A. Villages having some population at Oile or [See notc (c») more of the ten censuses ending with tbe 1961 10. 1941 (79) 1931 (142) census a d also having a village site indicating the J 921 (102) 1911 (130) 1941-1951 existence of an established community. Decade of 11. Malalagoppa 1941 (20) 1931 abandonment (46) 1921 (37) 1911 (86) 19UI I. Amblikatle 1881 (24) 1881-1891 (66) 1891 (96) 1881 (118) 2. Bylukoppa 1871 (44) 11)71.1881 1871 (81) 1941-1951 76

12. pugatekoppa 1951 (83) 1931 112 in 1891 to 37 in 1901 is ignored as (52) 1921 (43) 1911 (139) population increased to 56 by 1911. 1901 (127) 1891 (110) 1881 (b) Echavadi is treated as abandoned between (104) 1871 (125) 1951-1961 1881 and 1891 wben its population dec­ [See note (d)] lined from 11 to nil. The population 13. Ramenaballi 1931 (60) 1921 returned in 1921 is treated as transient. (67) 1911 (79) 1901 (97) lE>91 (c) Israpura is taken as abandoned between (106) 1881 (96) 1871 (71) 1931-1941 1921 and 1931 when its population dec­ 14. Somagoppa 1931 (9) 1921 (4) lined from 17 to nil ignoring the depopu­ 1911 (1) 1901 (10) 1891 (64) lation between 190 I and 1911 as the 1881 (25) 1871 (10) 1891-1901 population in 1921 was more than one [See note (e)] third the population in 1901. U. Somasettikoppa 1931 (51) (d) Pugatekoppa is taken as abandoned bet­ 1921 (46) 1911 (54) 1901 (59) ween 1951 and 1961 ignoring the decline 1891 (64) 1881 (56) 1871 (58) 1931-1941 of population from 139 to 43 between 1911 16. Tharaganahalli 1891 (27) 1881 and 1921 as the population in 1931 was more than one third the popUlation in (27) 1871 (28) 189l-l901 1911. 17. Sakrebylu 1961 (19) 1941 (7) 1931 (80) 1921 (46) 1911 (13) (e) Somagoppa is taken as abandoned between 1901 (8) 1891 (30) 1881 (18) 1891 and 1901 when its popUlation declined from 64 to 10. 1871 (56) 1931-l941 [See note (f)] (f) Sakrebylu is taken as abandoned between 18. Yalavalli 1951 (15) 1941 (34) 1931 and 1941 when its population dec­ 1931 (I) 1921 (61) 1911 (79) lined from 80 to 7. The decline from 56 1901 (103) 1891 (101) 1881 to 18 between 1871 and 1881 and that bet­ (71) 1871 (86) 1951-1961 ween 1891 and 1901 from 30 to 8 are [See note (g)] ignored as the population in 1891 was more than 1/3 the population in 1871 and A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been esta­ that in 1911 was more than 1/3 the popu­ blished settlements, having regard to the population lation in 1891. pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 (g) Yalavalli is taken as abandoned between census, even though there are no village sites. 1951 and 1961 ignoring the decline in I. Channadevanakoppa 1871 (46) 1871-1881 population from 61 to 1 between 1921 and 2. Chittemana 1901 (5) 1891 (9) 1931, as the population in 1941 was more 1881 (81) 1871 (18) 1881-11191 than 1/3 that in 1921. [See note (h)] (h) Chittemane is taken as abandoned between 3. Hosakote 1911 (187) 1901 1881 and 1891 when its population dec­ (73) 1891 (25) 1881 (33) 1871 1911-]921 lined from 81 to 9. (35) 4. Naidile 1951 (91) 1941 (48) T - Transient 1931 (48) 1921 (50) 1911 (66) Villages in which the popUlation found during one 1901 (72) 1891 (57) Hl81 (54) or more of the ten censuses ending with .en 1961 1871 (50) 1951-1961 census is deemed to have comprised transients. 5. Saddikoppa 1961 (22) 1951 having regard to the absence of village sites and the (18) 1941 (45) 1931 (14) 1921 population pattern. (49) 1911 (73) 1901 (99) 1891 (83) 1881 (168) 1871 (150) 1961-1971 1. Kempanakoppa 1961 (5) 2. Madekoppa 1871 (3) NOTE: (a) Byranakoppa is taken as abandoned bet­ ween 1961 and 1971 when its population 3. Siddapura 1961 (6) declined from 26 to nil. The decline from 4. Kallinalu 1911 (24) 77 The following table shows the number of villages decades from 1871 to 1971. abandoned before J871 and during each of the

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 187 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2 2 4 3 2 1 3 2 4 2

------~------

SORAB TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 44 3. Biligalikoppa 1921(19) 1911 Information not available .•. 1 (23) 1901(13) 1891(34) 1881 Balance .. .43 (36) 1871(77) 1921-1931 Of these number having village site ... 24 4. Brahmanavadah01ekatte 1931 (29) 1921(51) 1911(31) 1901 N-Ncver Inllabitci (18) 1891(50) 1881(26) 1871 Villages which had not been inhabited at any time (19) 1931-1941 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- S. BrahmanavadainduvaIli 1891 (65) 1881(40) 1871(20) 197] and by the absence of village site. 1891-1901 (;. Brahmanavadatalcbylu 1951 (I) Balagodu (11) 1941(6) 1911(7) 1901(9) (2) Chandragutti State Forest (3) Devagondikoppa 1891(10) 1881(11) 1871(3) (4) Haralukoppa [See note (b)] 1911-1921 (5) Jademadapura 7. Gummanahalli 1941(9) 1931 (6) Kanakoppa (35) 1921(49) 1911(132) 1901 (7) Madapura (TeJagadde) (253) 1891(191) 1881(207) (8) Mallasallludra 1871 (228) (9) Mokoppa [See note (c)] 1931-1941 (lU) Siddihalli Plantation 8. Hiremakoppa 1881(5) 1871 (11) Telagadde State Forest (43) [See note (d)] 1871-1881 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the existence of village site indicating existence of an 9. Kattinakere 1921(23) 1911(37) established community sometime prior to 1871 even 1901(25) 1891(7) 1871(19) 1921-1931 though the village has not returned any population 10. Katur 1891(43) 1881(43) 1871 through out the period 1871-1971. (116) 1891-1901 1. Dyavagodu 11. Khotari 1891(31) 1881(19) 1871(57) 2. Halekoppa 1891-1901 3. Yadematte 12. Kodikoppa 1941(171) 1931 (320) 1921(303) 1911(322) A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or 1901(334) 1891(298) 1831(239) more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 1871 (250) 1941-1951 census and also having a village site indicating the 13. Koppadabalu 1911 (35) 1901 existence of an established community. (46) 1891 (66) 1881 (60) 1871 (68) Decade of 1911-1921 abandonment 14. Kunaji 1931 (25) 1921 (32) 1. Badanakatte 1931(3) 1921(7) 1911 (62) 1901 (67) 1891 (59) 1911(43) 1901(66) 1891(64) 1881 (54) 1871 (62) 1931-1941 1881(80) 1871(101) 15. Nandigudde 1881 (21) 1881-1891 [See note (a)] 1911-1921 16. Narasipura 1901 (6) 1871 (14) 2. Bendekoppa 1871 (27) 1871-1 g81 [See note (e)] 1871-1881 78

17. Shanthipura 1891 (16) 1881 (d) Hirema kappa is taken as. abandoned bet­ (17) 1871 (21) 1891-1901 ween 1871 and 1881 when its population declined from 43 to 5. l:)jjanipura 1891 (30) 1891-1901 18. (e) Narasipura is taken as abandoned between 19. Vardikoppa 1891 (36) 1881 1871 and 188 I when its population declined (25) 1871 (37) 1891-1901 from 14 to nil. The population returned in 1901 is treated as transient. 20. Halagatta 1961 (9) 1911 (I) (f) Halagatta is taken as abandoned between 1901 (6) 1891 (8) 188 I (23) 190 I and 1911 when its population declined 1871 (39) from 6 to i. [See note (f)] 1901-1911 (g) Balekoppa is taken as abandoned between 1921 and 1931 wben its population declined A.I1.B. Villages which are deemed to have been from 67 to 15. established settlements, having regard to the popu­ lation pattern during the ten censuses ending with T - Transient 1961 census, even though there are no village sites. Villages in which the population found during 1. Balkeoppa 1961 (7) 1941 (19) one or mere of the ten censuses endillg with the 1961 1931 (15) 1921 (67) 1911 (24) census is de· med to have comprised transients, 1901 (41) 1891 (54) 1881 (78) baving regard to the absence of village sites and the 1871 (91) population pattern. [See note (g)] 1921-1931 1. Dodderikoppa 1901 (12) 1891 (14) 1881 (20) 1871 (8) NOTE: (a) Badanakatte is taken. as abandoned between 2. Ganganakoppa 1921 (5) 1911 (2) 1911 and 1921 when its population declined 3. Hesarikoppa 1901 (3) 1891 (3) from 43 to 7. 4. Shiravanthe 1911 (17) 1891 (II) 1881 (I) (b) Brahmanavadatalebylu is taken as aban­ 5. Thumari 1881 (6) doned between 191 I and 1921 when its 6. Uaiguddekoppa 1881 (10) population declined from 7 to nil. The 7. Devarahosakoppa 1961 (31) 1881 (5) 1871 (9) population returned in 1941 and 1951 is 8. Bommarasikoppa 1901 (2) treated as transient. (c) Gummanahalli is taken as abandoned bet­ The following table shows th e number of villages ween 1931 and 1941 when its population abandoned before 187 I and during each of the declined from 35 to 9. decades from 1871 to 1971.

1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 Before 187l 1881 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1871 1881 1891 6 3 3 3 J. 3 -_. __'-_-

'IBl&'f.HAHALLI TALUK Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 2 Decade of Of these number having village site ... 1 abandonment 1. Thotadakoppa 1931 ()) 1921 N-Never Inhabited (38) 1911 (41) 1901 (Ill) 1891 Villages which had not been inhabited rat any time (109) 1881 (88) 1871 (133) during the past 150 years as evidenced by their [See note (a)] 1921-1931 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1971 and by the absence of village site. A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ -Nil- lished settlements. having regard to the population pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 A.II.A. Villages baving some population at one or Dlore of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census, even though there are. no village sites. census and also having a village site indicating the 1. (AJamanepalu) Basagara 1951 (I) 1931 (6) 1921 (13) 19I1 (13) existence of an established community. 79

19l11 (13) 1881 (15) 1871 population declined from 6 to nil. The (3 Ii) depopulation between 1881 and 1891 is [See notl;: (b)] 1931-1941 ignored as the population in 1901 was almost equal to that in 1881. NOTE: (a) Thotadakoppa is taken as abandoned bet­ ween 1921 and 1931 when its population The following table shows the number of villages declined from 38 to 5. abandoned before 1871 and during each of the (b) (Alamancpalu) Ba,agara is taken as aban­ decades from 1871 to 1971. doned between 19 J I and 1941 when its

------~~~~ Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1951 1971 I 1 CHAPTER XI

TUMKUR DISTRICT

CHIKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 18 7. Pura 1911 (37) 190 I (30) 1891 Of these numbering having village site ... 10 (40) 1881 (30) 1871 (64) 1911-1921 8. Thonnalapura 1881 (19) 1871 N- Never Inhabited (39) 1881-1891 Vmages whkh had not been inhabited at any time 9. Yarehalli 1911 (38) 1901 (34) during the past 150 years as evidenced by their re­ maining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 1891 (13) 1881 (7) 1871 (33) 1911-1921 1971 and by the absence of village site. 1. Ankasandra Kaval NOTE: (a) Dasihalli is treated as abandoned between 2. Bhumana Katte 1871 and 1881 when its population declined 3. Harogondanahalli from 61 to nil. The population returned in 4. Kuruhatti Kaval 1941 after sixty years of depopulation is S. Purshenahalli deemed transient. This probably consisted of the urban population of Chikanayakana· A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the exis­ halli tClwn i.e. of the persons who had vaca­ tence of village site indicating existence of an estab­ ted their houses in the Town on acco unt of lished community sometime prior to 1871 even plague infection and were living in sheds though the village has not returned any popUlation erected in this village which is close to the throughout the period 1871-1971. Town. This view gets support from the fact 1. Channenahalli. that the popUlation of Chiknayakanahalli Town in 1941 was 3313 as against 6612 in A.IlA. Villages having some population at one or 1931 and 8388 in 1951. more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 cen­ (b) Mallenahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ sus and also having a village site indicating the ween I &71 and 1881 when its population existence of an established community. declined from 23 to nil. In view of the Decade of repopulation of the village sixty years later abandonment between 1941 and 1961 it is treated as aban­ 1. DasihalIi 1941 (485) 1871 (61) doned a second time between 1961 and [See note (a) ] 1871·1881 197 I. 2. Hombalaghatta 1921 (10) 1911 (c) Pemmalaevarahalli is taken as abandoned (19) 1901 (13) 1891 (14) 1881 between 1931 an11941 when its popUlation (30) 1871 (52) 1921·1931 declined from 20 to 4. 3. Katenahalli 1871 (10) 1871-1881 (d) Yarehalli is treated as abandoned between 4. Madanahalli 1871 (47) 1871-1881 1911 and 1921 ignoring the decline in popu­ 5. Ma!lenahalli 1961 (98) 1951 lation from 33 in 187l to 7 in 188l, as the (72) 1941 (37) 1871 (23) 1871-1881 population in 1891 was 13, i e. more than [See note (b) ] 1f3 the population in 1871. Abandoned for the second time between 1961 & 1971 T - Transient 6. Pemmaladevarahalli 1941 (4) Villages in which the population found during one 1931 (20) 1921 (19) 1911 (28) or more of the ten censuses ending with the 196 j 1901 (27) 1891 (29) 1881 (26) census is deemed to have comprised transients, hav­ 1871 (50) 1931-1941 ing regard to the absence of village site and tbe [See note (c) ]. popUlation pattern. ~I

1. Balekona (Forest) 1951 (5) The following table shows the number of villages 2. Balenahalli 1961 (6) 1921 (66) 1901 (2) 1891 (4) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 3. HullenahaIli 1901 (15) 1871 (7) decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 um 1&81 1891 1901 1911 Inl 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1 4 2

GUBBI TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 50 Decade of Merged in adjoining urban area ... 1 abandonment (Gubbi Rural) I. Chintaranahalli 1871 (60) 1871-1881 Information not available ., .11 2. Kodimallenahalli 1941 (9) Balance ... 38 1931 (10) 1921 (7) 1911 (2]) Of these number having village site ... 8 1901 (14) 1891 (33) 1881 (14) 187l (42) 1941-1951 N-Never Inhabited (See note (a) ) Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 3. Kurubarahalli 187 I (23) 1871-1881 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 4. MayappanahalJi 1871 (28) 1871-1881 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- 5. Naikana Kere 1901 (11) 1901-1911 1971 and by the absence ofvi!1age site. 6. Sirivallehalli 1871 (14) 1871-1881 7. Hanumantbapura 1961 (50) 1. Benehallada Kava1 1951 (34) 1941 (37) 1931 (34) 2. Chandrasekharapura village Kaval 1921 (22) 1911 (17) 1901 (20) 3. Changavi Kaval 1891 (18) 1881 (3) 1871 (56) 1961-1971 4. Echa1a Kaval (See note (b) ) Gedlahalli 5. A.U.B. Villages which are deemed to have been estab­ 6. Huchanapalya lished settlements, having regard to the population 7. HulJuharave Ka,ul pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 8. Iilgalada Kava! census, even though there are no village sites. 9. Kasimata 1. Ankapura 1921 (8) 1911 (21) 10. Nanjundapura 1901 (41) 1891 (42) 1921-1931 2. llabigonahalli 1951 (62) 1941 11. Petekurbarahalli (33) 1911 (35) 1901 (7) 1891 12. Rangapura M (12) 1881 (20) 1871 (16) 1911-1921 13. Siddapura (See note (c) ) 14. Virapura 3. Bidare Amanikere 1961 (59) 15. Yere Kaval 1951 (13) 1961-1971 4. Chandrasekharapura Amani­ A. I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the kere 1961 (61) 1951 (10) 1941 existence of village site indicating existence of an (6) 1931 (8) 1961-1971 established community sometime prior to 1871 even 5. Channavaderahalli 1941 (6) though the village has not returned any population 1931 (19) 1921 (17) 1911 (18) throughout the period 1871-197L 1901 (39) 1891 (17) 1881 (12) I. Banniganahalli 1871 (27) 1931-1941 (See note (d) ) A. II. A. Villages having some population at one or 6. Mukanahallipatna Amanikere more of the ten censuses ending With the 1961 cen­ 1961 (2) 1951 (4) 1941 (3) 1931 sus and also having a village site indicating the (4) 1921 (2) 1901 (12) 1961-1971 existence of an established community. (See note (e) ) 82

transient at the villflge was I,mi~n!!Ritep. in NO:Tll : (a) Kodimallenaballi is treated as abandoned 1871, 1881, and 1891 and agail.l in 1,9ll. between 1941 and 1951 when its population declined from 9 to nil. The decline in popu­ T -Transient lation from 22in 1911 to 7in 1921 is ignored Villages in which the population fOl.lnd durip.g 91Ul as the population in 1931 was more than or more of the ten censuses ending with the· J~§l one third the population in 1911. census is decmed to have comprised transients. (b) Hanumanthapura is treated as abandoned having regard to the absence of village sites and the between 1961 and 1971 when its population poplllation pattern. declined from 50 to nil ignoring the earlier 1. Chittappanahalli 1961 (2) decline from 56 in 1871 to 3 in 1881 in view 2. Doddanetagunte Amanikere 1961 (372) 1911 of the population increasing to 18 by 1891. (20) 1891 (6) (c) Babigonahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ 3. Gedlahalli M 1871 (8) ween 1911 and 1921 when its population 4. Karadikallu 1871 (31) declined from 35 to nil. The population returned in 1941 and 1951 is treated as 5. Karegondanahalli 1881 (72) transient. 6. " rallasandrakittte 190 I {9) 188 1 (~) (d) Channavaderahalli is treated as abandoned 7. Mavinahalli Amanikere 1961 (18) between 1931 and 1941 when its population 8. Rangapura 1881 (5) 1871 (55) declined from 19 to 6. 9. Thyagatur Amanikere 1891 (6) (e) Mukanaballipatna Amanikere is treated as abandoned between 1961 and 1971, ignoring The following table shows the num~ _00 lliH~ges the depopulation between 1901 and 1911. abandoned before 1871 and during .e~ch Qf~h~ deca­ The population found in 1901 is treated as des from 1871 to 1971.

1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 4 1 1 1 4

K(>>>'ATAGERE TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 26 2. KarekallahaIli Information oot available ... 4 3. Kurabarahalli Balance ... 22 Of these number having village site ... 11 A II.A. Villages having some popUlation at one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census N-:-Never Inhabited and also having a village site indi~atiQg.t~.~xisf4lnce Villages which had not been inhabited at any time of an established community. during the past 15.0 years as evidenced by their re­ P~~aqe of maining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- aballdonment 1971 and by the absence of v lJlage site I. Byrenahalli 1881 (7) 1871 (60) 1. Gangenahalli [See note (a)] 1871-1881 2. GollachionahaIli 2. Golladeverahalli 1891 (13) 3. Madhavarayanapalya 1881 (28) 1871 (63) l,j~j":~I 4. Muggeeranakalve 3. Hanumanthapura 1901 (9) 5, Ranganahalli 1891 (1) 1881 (I) 1871 (93) 181J-lasl [See note (b) 1 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the exis­ 4. Kanivehosahalli 1921 (I 5) }~21-1.!)31 tence of village site indicating existence of an esta­ 5. K. Bevinahalli 1881 (3) 1871 blished community sometime prior to 1871 even (5) 1881-1891 though the village has not returned any population 6. Rayapura 1871 (35) 187hl~1 throughout the period 1871-1971. 7. Ugaranahalli 1961 (l) 1961"Hl71 1. Chow1akunte 8. VenkannanahaIli 1871 (78) 1871-1&81 83

&H;.JJ~ ViJl~ which are deemed to have been esta­ T -Transient blished settlements. having regard to the population Villages in which the population found during one pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 ceIl'9lJ'Il, even th(mgh theie are no village sites. census is deemed to have comprised transients. having regard to the absence of village sites and the Nil population pattern. 1. Doddenahalli 1891 (l) N'OTE : Ca)' Byrenahalli is treated as abandoned between 2. Kongenahalli 1871 (3) 1871 and 1881 when its population declined 3. Mabanthagonaballi 1871 (14) from 60 to 7. 4. Musavinakallu 1871 (3) 5. Srinivasapura 1961 (1) 1931 (11) (b) Hanumanthapura is treated as abandoned 1911 (7) 1881 (37) 1871 (94) between 1871 and 1881 when its population 6. Thigalarahalli 1871 (32) declined from 93 to 1. The population re­ The following table shows the number of villages turned in 1891 and 1901 was far less than abandoned before 1871 and during each of the de­ one third the population in 1871. cades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 189.1 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 3 4 1

1.!oful number of uninhabited villages ih 1971 ... 23 Decade of Information not available ... 4 abandonment Balance ••. 19 1. Devasthanadadasanapura 1951 01\ttiese number having village site ... 4 (7) 1901 (9) 1891 (8) 18"81 (36) 1871 (69) 18'8T·1'891 [See note (a ,] N - Never Inhabited V1.ltages which bad not been inhabited at any time 2. Hampapura 19I1 (36) 1901 dUring the past 150 years as evidenced by their re­ (40) 1891 (37) 1881 (47) 1871 maining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- (45) 191'1-1921 19V1· and by the absence of village site. 3. 1911 (14) 1901 (15) 1. Alalapura 1891 (21) 1881 (2,» 1871 (45) 1911-1921 2.. Amanikere 3. Gottikerehantha A.II.B. Villages which are deemed to have been esta­ blished settlements, having regard to the population 4. NeelathatiaHi Ane pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 5:· Sempurada Kaval census, even though there are no village sites. I. Herur KenchigalaTJurada Amani­ kH: Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the exis­ kere 1941 (3) 1931 (6) 1921 tence of village' site indicating existence of an esta­ (20) 1911 (55) 1901 (6) 1921·1931 blished community sometime prior to 1871 even [See note (b) 1 thb'Ugh the village has not returned any population throughout the period 1871·1971. 1. Seshapur1t NOTE: (a) Devasthanadadasanapura is treated'as aban­ doned between ]881 and 1891 when its population dec1iDed from 36 to 8. A.II.A. Villages baving some population at one or more of tbe ten censuses ending with the 1961 census (b) Herur Kenchigalapurada Amanikere is and also having a village site indicating the exis­ treated as abandoned belween 1921 and 1931 tence of an established community. when its population declined from 20 to 6. 84

T -Transient 5. Krishna Sagara Agrahara (shown as Krishna Villages in which the population found during one Sagara in Village Tables upto 1941) 1911 (18) or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 1901 (56) census is deemed to have comprised transients 6. Kunigalbagayat 1931 (17) 1911 (113) 1901 (51) having regard to the absence of village sites and the 7. Nademavinapurada Kaval 1921 (9) population pattern. 8. Sunnadapura 1891 (10) 1. Begur Amanikere 1901 (31) 9. Taggikuppe 1911 (58) 1901 (87) 1881 (4) 1871 (25) 2. ChikkajjanahaIli 1961 (15) 1871 (43) The following table shows the Dumber of villages 3. Chottanahallihantha 1921 (2) 1911 (5) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the de­ 4. Kithanamangala Amanikere 1921 (5) cades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 187l 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 2

MADHUGIRI T ALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 .. AS Decade of Information not available ... 7 abandonment Balance ... 38 1. Bettadaranganaballi 1871 (74) 1871-1881 Of these number having viilage site ... 22 2. Byrapura 1951 (13) 1941 (18) 1871 (17) 1871-1881 N-Never Inhabited [See note (a)l Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 3. Channavara 1871 (18) 1871-1811 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 4. Chikkaveeragondanahalli 1871 remaining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- (29) 1871-1881 1971 and by the absence of village site. 5. Doddenahalli 1871 (66) 1871-1881 1. 6. Jogihalli 1941 (140) 1921 (4) 2. Chikkegowdanaroppa 1911 (1) 1901 (11) 1871 (5) 1941-19.51 3. Dasarahalli 7. Karenahalli 1871 (72) 1871-1881 4. Galihalli 8. Kattijogipalya 1881 (12) 1871 5. Gondi (27) 1881-1891 6. Gopalahalli 9. Mallanaikanahalli 1921 (1) 1921-1931 7. Karekenchanahalli 10. Nallahalli 1921 (6) 1901 (6) 8. Kurummanakote Thimmanapalya 1871 (17) 1871-1881 9. Seegalahalli [See note (b)] 11. Obalapura 1941 (136) 1931 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as eVidenced by the exis­ (12) 1921 (38) 1911 (28) 1901 tence of village site indicating existence of an esta­ (26) 1941-1951 blished community sometime prior to 1811 even 12. Pemmenahalli 1891 (21) 1881 though the village has not returned any population (22) 1871 (188) 1871-1881 throughoot the period 1871-1971. 13. Ramanahalli 1931 (4) 1921 1. Pujarahalli (29) 1931 (35) 1901 (37) 1891 2. Tirumaladevarahalli (32) 1881 (60) 1871 (96) 1921-1931 3. Veeranagenahalli [See note (c)] 4. Yaragunte 14. Ranganahalli 1951 (11) 1871 (38) 1871-1881 A.II.A.. Villages having some population at one or [See note (d)] more of the ten censuses ending with the ~ 961 census 15. Thimmasandra 1931 (109) and also having a village site indicating the existence 1921 (46) 1911 (40) 1901 (22) of an established community. 1891 (35) 1881 (21) 1871 (28) 1931-1941 85

16. Thippapura 1871 (12) 1871-1881 (e) Venkateshpura is taken as abandoned bet­ 17. Varadanahalli 1921 (34) 1911 ween 1871 and 1881 when its population (45) 1901 (32) 1891 (28) 1881 declined from 23 to 7. Tbe PopUlation retur­ (13) 1871 (18) 1921-1931 ned in 1961 is treated as transient. 18. Venkateshpura 1961 (6) 1881 (7) 1871 (23) 1871-1881 T-Transient [See note (e)] Villages in which the population found during one or more of the ten cem;us ending with the 1961 A.IIB. Villages which are deemed to have been esta­ census is deemed to have comprised transients, blished settlements, having regard to the population having regard to the absence of village sites and the pattern during the ten census ending with 1961 population pattern. censUs. even though there are no village sites. 1. Cbikkanaikanapalya 1871 (184) 1. Byadarapalya 1901 (6) 1891 2. Giddenahalli 1961 (7) 1951 (24) 1941 (272) (7) 1881 (4) 1901-1911 1901 (12) 2. MadaliyarahalLi 1961 (16) 1951 3. Makethimmanahalli L921 (3) 1871 (9) (12) 1941 (12) 1961-1971 4. Sajjalahalli 1871 (138) 5. Thumlu 1921 (8) 1871 (145) NOTE: (a) Byrapura is taken as abandoned between 1871 and 1881 when its population declined NOTE : Giddenahalli is not brought under the Category from 17 to nil. The population returned in A.II.B. even though it was populated during 1941 and 1951 is treated as transient. three successive censuses as the population in (b) Nallahalli is treated as abandoned between 1941 was transient. comprising people who 1871 and 1881 when its population declined had vacated Madhugiri Town on account of from 17 to nil. The poulation returned in plague infection and were living in sheds in this 1901 and J 921 is treated as transient. village which is about 2 or 3 kilometres from (c) Ramanahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ the Town. The population of Madhugiri Town ween 1921 and 1931 when its population in 1941 was 1460 as against 5865 in 1931 and declined from 29 to 4. 5916 in 1951. (d) Ranganahalli is treated as abandoned bet­ ween 1811 and 1881 when its popUlation The following table shows the number of villages declined from 38 to nil. The popUlation abandoned before 1871 and during each of the returned in 1951 is taken to be transient. decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 19 II 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 4 11 1 1 3 1 2

PAVAGADA TALUK

Tota.l number of uninhabited villages in 1971 •.• 9 established community sometime prior to 1871 even Of these number having village site ... 4 though the village has not returned any population throughout the period 1871-1971. N-Never Inbabited Villages which had not been inhabited at any time 1. Kashipura during the past 150 years as evidenced by their 2. Rangappanahalli remaining uninhabited througbout the period 1871- 1971 and by the absence of village site. 3. Thimmalapura 1. Dandenahalli 2. Madlerahalli 3. Mummadisagara A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the census and also having a village site indicating the existence of village site indicating existence of an existence of an established community. 86

Decade of census is deemed to have comprised transients, abandonment having regard to the absence of village site and 1. KalMalahalU 1911 OS,) 1:9.Ol the population p1ttern. (9) 1189.1 (22) 188;1 (l9~ 11m 1. Bommanagalhihalli 1871 (28:) (54) 1911-1921 2. Siddappanakatte 1871 (76)

'F--~nt- The following table shows the numhr fIJf villages Vl1+ages'in which the l'OlJulatioIt fQund dUring one abandoned before 1871 and during each of the or more ofthtt ten censuses' ending with the t961 decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 190'1 19iH 1921 1931 1941 1961 1871 1&&1 t891 1·911' 1921 1'931" 1:941' 1951 1>971 3

SIRA TALUK

Total number of uninhabited' villages in- 1971 " .25 3. Chikkagiril{anabaUi 1931 (7) Information not available ... 5 1-9-21 (31) 1911 (I) 1871 (15) M:ergeo in adjoining urban area (Sira ~ral) .. , 1 [See note (a)] Balallce ... 19 Abandoned· fur a second' time Oft)1ese number having vitlage site ... 13 during 1931-1941 11871-1881 4: Halkiun Kava11931 (14) 1921- N-N~vel'" Inbabited' (IJ) 19U (4l2) 1931-1941 Vi1Iages wbich had' npt been inhabited' at any time 5. HolakaUu. 19.31 (12) 1921 (B) dlJdng the Pl\st 1'50' years as evidenced by their 19B (17) 1901 (4) 1891 (10)' re,m.illing qninhabited th1'ougl1out'the p,eriod 1871- 1881 (18) 1871 (101) 1971 and by the absence of villagil site. [See note (b)] 1871-1881 1. Budigudda Kaval 6, Katanahalli 1871" (:37) 1871-1881 2, OUd.dadamng,_anahllllj 7. Katanahal1i 1871 (48) 1871-1881 3. ~iveraJllPur,a. 8. Pinnanahole 195-1 (117) 19M, 4. Kusukunte Kaval (23) 1931 (4) 1921 (13) 19i;l 5. Maridasanahalli (19) 1901 (15) 1881 (10) 6. Sulll:\lahalu [See note (e)] 195i... I981 7. ThimmanahalJi 9; Punijihalli 1911 (28): 1901 (39-); 1891 (20) 1871 (29) A.I. Abandoned prior- to 1871 as evidenced by the [See-note (d)] 1911-1921 existence of village site indicating existence of an established community sometime prior to 1871 even NOTB : (a) Chikkagiriyanahalli is tall2en, as aba'udbnet1 though the village has not returned any population between 1871 and 1881 when its population throJ'ghqut tbe ~iQd, 187J -1971. declined from 15 to nil. As the village 1:, :&alQJl4lohUi· returned popUlation in 1911, 192"l'and"1'931, 2. Madenahalli' it is treated as abandoned a second time 3. Muddappanahalli between 1931 and 1941. (b) Holakallu is treated as abandoned' between A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or 1871 and lE81 when its population' dbclined more of the ten censuseS' enditrg> with, th& 1961 from 101 to 18. census and also having a village, site. indiqlting the (c) Pinnanahole is taken as abandoned' between existence of an established community. Decade of 1951 and 1961 ignoring the deRPpulation ahandQllment between 1881 and 1891; as the p_opulation 1., ~yan;j.bal!iJ871 (54) 1871-1881 in 1901 exceeded tlie population' in'l~l. ,2. C1;ll;lnnena)lalli 1941(14»931. (d) Punijihalli is taken as abandoned between (18) 192Um 1911 (llJ 1901 1911 and 1921 when its population declined 19) 1891 (II) 1941-1951 from 28 to nil. The depopulatioll between 81

1871 and 1881 is ignored as the popuhltion The following table shows the nwnber of'Vitbges In 1891 was more tha.n two thirds that in . abandoned Were 187l aDd dllring ~h of the 1871. depades f1'Qp} J~1J tp 1971.

1W~Qrt; 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1..951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 3 5 1 1 1 1

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1911 ... 10 A.n.B. Villages which are deemed to have been Of ~ number having village site ... 1 established settlements, havin~ regard to the popu· lation pattern during the ten censuses endiUi with N-Never Inhabited 1961 census, even th9u~ tb.~re are no village> sites. VWages which had not been inhabited at any time 1. Badanekatte 1961 (19) 1951 during the past 150 years as evidenced by their (17) 1941 (11) 1931.(5) 1921 remaining uninhabited throughout the pClriod 1871- (6) 1911 (5) 1871 (19) 1971 and by the absence of village site. [See note (a)l 1961-1971 2. Kenchamaranahalli 1891 (1) 1. Kagehallada .Kava! 1881 (8) 1871 (36) 2. Kallenahalli Kaval [See note (b)] 1871'1881 3. Kihbanahali Amanilwe 4. Siddenahalli NOTE: (a) The depopulation of Badanekatte between 1871 a,U9 1881 wlIich contjpu.ed in 1891 and A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 1901 is iBnored in view oft.he village .being existence of village site indicating ellistoncc of an P9pu~le9 cO!;ltip.],lQl)sly frQJ;ll 1911 to 1961. established community sometime prior to 1871 even (b) Kencha~aIl",h~li is tr.e~ted as ablUl40ned tMugh the village has not returned any po.puIatioo between 1871 and 1881 whep tile Powlation throughout tlte period 1871·1971. declined from 36 to 8.

-NiI- T - Transient ViU~~ in wbicll tlJe PQludat~ (OttG9 during one A:D.A. Villages having some population at one or or more of the ~n ilUl>P$S ~ditlg witb the 1961 moll! of the tcn censuses ending with the 1961 ~\I.$ is dCj)rocd to have ~mprksed tr~nts, AJe1lSUS and also having a village site indicating the havmg reaar!! to the·abSl;ucc ·of viUige s.\«l AAd the exi"tcnce .of an established community. lW.pul~ion pattern. L li~lk!lrki Arndt Mahal Kaval1941 (36) Decade of ~, Kabbili Kava' Inl (6) abandonmen t 3, Sbankaranahalli 19ftJ (IS) 1. SiI;l~enahalli 195J (12) 1941(3) 19~1 {29) 1921 (30) 1911 (11) The follOWing tab4:. sh()ws the IlWP1>~r of villages 1901 (44) 1891 (20) 1881 (31) I/.ba,D,~Qned before 1871 and during MCh of the 1871 (39) 1951-1961 decades from 1871 to }971.

B,.ef(l[ll 1871 1881 1891 1901 19H . 19.21 193} 194} 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1%1 1971 -:

TIJMItlJR TAL UK

T,Q.t31IluDilher OflJIlinbabited villages in 1971 ... 43 .QallJIl~e ... 42 lv,ConnatiQu not available ... 1 Of these number having village site ... 12 88

N-Never Inhabited 8. Palasandra 1911 (7) 1871 (150) 1871·1881 Village which had not been inhabited at any time [See note (d)] during the past 150 years as evidenced by their reo 9. Kembalalu Amanikere 1961 maining uninhabited throughout the period 1871- (91) 1951 (58) 1941 (90) 1931. 1971 and by the absence of village site. (89) 1921 (78) 1911 (71) 1901 1. Bavajjanahalli (79) 1891 (138) 1961·1971 2. Dasacharipalya 3. Doddanapalya A.I1.B. Villages which are deemed to have been esta­ 4. Giriyanahalli blished settlements, having regard to the population 5. Kanakuppe Amanikere pattern during the ten censuses ending with 1961 6. Karigiripalya census, even though there are no village site5. 7. Kembalaluvalagere Kaval 1. BelIavi Amanikere 1961 (2) 8. Amanikere 1951 (9) 1941 (12) 1931 (5) 9. Kumbarahallikere 1921 (8) 1961-1971 10. Nagavalli Amanikere 2. Hebbaka Amanikcre 1961 (43) 11. Pagademaranahalli Kaval 1941 (24) 1931 (4) 1921 (5) 12. Pandithanahalli 1911 (8) 1901 (7) 196I-l971 13. Ramadevarabetta [See not (e)] 14. Sogenahalli 3. Lingapura 1941 (61) 1931 (57) 15. Singarihalli 1921 (53) 1911 (83) 1901 (121) 16. Thulasipura 1891 (80) 1881 (57) 1871 (229) 1941-1951 17. Vaderaballi [See note (f)] 18. Veera napalya 4. SogenahaIli 1961 (14) 1951 (16) 1931 (14) 1871 (87) 1871·1881 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the exis­ 5. Vasanthalingapura 1921 (2) tence of village site indicating existence of an esta­ 1911 (4) 1891 (6) 1881 (I) 1921-1931 blished community sometime prior to 1871 even 1871 (2) though the village has not returned any population [See note (g)] throughout the period 1871-1971. I. Gollahalli NOTE: (a) Hottemallappanahalli is taken as abandoned 2. Lingenahalli between 1961 and 1971, ignoring the de· 3. Seegepalya popula' ion between 1941 and 1951 as the population in 1961 was nearly the same as A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or that on 1941- more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 (b) Nagenahalli is taken as abandoned between census and also having a village site indicating the 1871 and 1881 when its popUlation declined existence of an established community. from 37 to nil. The population returned in Decade of 1911 and 1921 is treated as transient. abandonment (c) Thimmalapura is treated as abandoned bet­ 1. Amani Hosakere 1961 (5) 1961-71 ween 1941 and 1951 when its population 2. 1871 (31) 1871-1881 declined from 209 to nil ignoring the earlier 3. Honnenahalli 1911 (I) 1911·1921 depopulation in 1891, in view of the village 4. Hottemallappanahalli 1961 (7) being populated continuously between 1901 1941 (8) 1961-1971 and 1941. [See note (a)] (d) Palasandra is treated as abandoned between 5. Nagenahalli 1921 (10) 1911 1871 and 1881 when its popUlation declined (9) 1871 (37) 1871-1881 from 150 to nil. The population retilrned in [See note (b)] 1911 is treated as transient. 6 Seebidasarahalli 1871 (24) 1871·1881 (e) The depopulation of Hebbaka Amanikere 7. Thimmalapura 1941 (209) between 1941 and 1951 is ignored as the 1931 (142) 1921 (163) 1911 population in 1961 exceeded that in 1941. (26) 1901 (1) 1881 (8) 1871 (f) Lingapura is taken as abandoned between ( 41) 1941-1951 1941 and 1951 when its popUlation declined [See note (c») from 61 to nil. The declined in the popUlation 89

229 to 57 between 1871 and 1881 is ignored ing regard to the absence of viHage sites and the as thc population in 1891 was more than population pattern. one third that in 187!. 1. Aralihalu 1871 (15) (g) Vasantha1ingapura is treated as abandoned 2. Devaraj:mahalli 1871 (75) between 1921 and 1931 when it became de­ 3. Kothihalli Kaval 1891 (9) populated. The decline in population from 4. Lakshmisagara 1.871 (7) 6 in 1891 to nil in 1901 is ignored as the 5. Mallasandra village Kaval 1961 (817) population in 1911 was 2/3 that in 1891. 6. Naganayakana Palya 1891 (10) 1881 (4) 7. Ramapura 1961 (31) 1941 (12) 1931 (27) T - Transient Villages in which the population found during one The following table shows the number of villages or more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 abandoned before 1871 and during each of the de­ census is deemed to have comprised transients, hav- cades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 3 5 1 _1______2______5

TURUVEKERE TALUK

Total number of uninhabited villages in 1971 ... 24 Decade of Of these number having village site ... 7 abandonment 1. Rajapura 1921 (14) 1911 (16) N- Never Inhabited . 1901 (25) 1891 (40) 1881 (I8) Villages which had not been inhabited at any tlll~e 1871 (48) 1921-1931 during the past 150 years as evidence~ by theIr 2. Shivanahalli 1901 (17) 189{ remaining uninhabited throughout the penod 1 &71- (36) 1881 tIO) 1871 (26) 190[-1911 1971 and by the absence of village site. 3. TUrllvekere Amanikere 1961 I. Ammanahalli (32) 1951 (24) 1941 (46) 1931 2. Basavasagara Chandragiri Kaval (225) 1921 (130) 1911 (107) 3. Byadarahalli Kaval 1901 (192) 1891 (112) 1881 4. Chatradeni Kaval (95) 1961-1971 5. Dananayakanapura Kaval 6. KaHane A.U.B. Villages which are deemed to have been 7. Sarigeba\li Amanikere cstablisheJ settlements, having regard to the popula­ 8. Sarigehalli Amrit Mahal Kaval tion pattern during the ten censuses ending with 9. Gundi Ka val 1961 census, even though there are no village sites. 10. Tuyalahalli Amanikere 1. N3gegowdanabyala 1961 (13) 1951 (16) 1941 (137) 1891 (8) 1961-1971 A.I. Abandoned prior to 1871 as evidenced by the 2. Abalakatte 1951 (8) 1941 (21) existence of village site indicating existence of an 1931 (11) 1951-1961 established community sometime prior to 1871 even though the village has not returned any population NOTE : Nagegowdanabyala is taken as abandoned bet­ throughout the period 1871-1971. ween 1961 and 1971 ignoring the depopulation 1. Bantarahalli between 1891 and 1901 in view of the reappea­ 2. Brahmadevarahalli rance of population continuously from 1941- 3. Kadalagidada Kaval !961. 4. Mallaghatta Amanikere T -Transient A.II.A. Villages having some population at one or Villages in \vhich the population found during one more of the ten censuses ending with the 1961 census Or more of tile ten censuses ending with the 1961 and also having a village site indicating the existence census is deemed to have comprised transients. of an established community. having regard to the absence of village sites and the 90

population pattern. 5. Vaderahalli Kaval 1961 (12) 1. Bediswaste 193) (18) 1911 (2) 2. Burudehosaballi 1881 (3) 1871 (9) The following table shows the number of villages 3. Pura Arnrit Mahal Kaval 1961 (2) 1901 (3) abandoned before 1871 and during each of the 4. Arndt Mahal Kaval 1911 (4) decades from 1871 to 1971.

Before 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1871 1881 1891 190r 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 t 4 1 1 1 CHAPTER XII

CONSOLIDATLD PICTURE FOR THE NINE DISTRICTS

The picture for the former princely State of Mysore which emerges from the districtwise discussion contained in the previous nine Chapters is exhibited in the following two Tables viz. Table I and Table II.

TABLE I

CLASSIFICATION OF UNINHABITED VILLAGES

Infor Never mation inha- Abandoned not Shifted Merged bited Tran- District/Taluk Total available S M N A.I. A.II.A. A.ILB sient ------_" 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Total for nine 2265 288 39 10 724 124 521 140 419 districts

I. BANGALORE DISTRICT 258 68 2 80 6 36 18 48

1. Anekel Taluk 23 7 4 1 9 2. Bangalore North Taluk 11 3 5 3 3. Bangalore South Taluk 10 5 3 4. Taluk 12 6 2 1 2 5. Devanhalli Taluk 38 13 13 3 3 6 6. Doddaballapur TaIule 36 13 8 2 8 4 7. Taluk 52 21 18 3 4 5 8. . Taluk 23 1 14 I 3 4 9. Taluk 29 4 2 5 2 8 3 5 10. Nelamangala Taluk 19 7 2 4 1 5 11. Ramanagaram Taluk 5 2 2

II. 126 16 23 7 39 13 27

1. Chikmagalur Taluk 15 3 5 2 5 2. Kadur Taluk 65 12 11 6 19 6 11 3. Koppa Taluk 4. Mudigere Taluk 5. Narasimharajapura Taluk 6. Sringeri ,Taluk 2 1 I 7. Taluk 42 4 9 15 4 9 92

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -~~'---~-- , -- ---~---. ---. -~------~ -- III. 231 23 3 67 15 54 13 56 1. Challakere Taluk 29 11 4 12 2. Chitradurga Taluk 26 3 8 1 8 5 1 3. Davangere Taluk 20 4 5 1 2 7 4. Harihar Taluk 10 2 3 2 3 5. Taluk 11 5 5 6. Taluk 37 3 12 3 11 1 7 7. Hosadurga Taluk 39 5 9 1 15 1 7 8. Jagalur Taluk 41 6 11 8 8 8 9. Molakalmuru Taluk 18 3 4 4 6 IV. HASSAN DISTRICT 260 51 85 22 55 13 34 1. Taluk 19 3 3 10 1 1 2. Arkalgud Taluk 42 9 16 7 4 2 4 3. Taluk 46 13 11 9 5 8 4. Belur Taluk 42 11 6 2 18 5 5. Channarayapatna Taluk 23 3 4 5 5 2 4 6. Hassan Taluk 32 8 14 1 5 2 2 7. Holenarsipur Taluk 48 4 30 3 1 9 8. Manjarabad (Saklespur) Taluk 8 3 3 V. 489 53 4 194 2:> 87 31 96 I. Bagepalli Taluk 22 9 6 2 3 2. Bangarpet Taluk 38 10 7 3 7 2 9 3. Chikballapur Taluk 33 1 13 1 10 3 5 4. Chintamani Taluk 72 3 39 1 7 2 20 5. Gudibanda Taluk 24 11 8 5 6. Gauribidanur Taluk 26 4 7 3 7 3 7. Kolar Taluk 45 8 15 2 7 5 8 8. Malur Taluk 74 8 29 6 7 4 19 9. Mulbagal Taluk 42 6 10 3 13 4 5 10. Siddlaghatta Taluk 55 5 31 2 4 3 10 11. Srinivaspur Taluk 58 7 23 2 11 5 9 VI. 144 10 3 57 7 30 3 34 1. Taluk 33 6 11 3 5 8 2. Maddur Taluk 6 2 2 3. Maiavalli Taluk 19 6 5 2 5 4. Mandya Taluk 10 2 4 3 1 5. Taluk 28 15 2 4 7 6. Taluk 35 2 14 8 10 7. Srirangapatna Taluk 13 5 3 3 93

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

VU. MYSORE DISTRICT 225 17 2 89 8 42 13 53

1, Chamarajnagar Taluk 23 11 1 3 7 2, Gundlupet Taluk 28 8 8 2 6 4 3. Heggadadevankote Taluk 52 7 22 1 8 3 10 4. Bunsur Taluk 30 1 13 5 2 9 5. Krishnarajnagar Taluk 30 1 13 1 6 3 6 6. Mysore Taluk 18 1 7 3 2 4 7. Taluk 20 9 1 4 1 5 8. Periyapatna Taluk 14 4 2 3 1 4 9. T. Narasipur Taluk 9 2 3 4 10. Yelandur Taluk

VIII. 259 18 31 48 12 110 18 22 I. Bhadravati Taluk 18 6 1 9 2 2. Channagiri Taluk 55 12 8 2 27 1 5 3. Honnali Taluk 27 4 3 3 13 2 2 4. Hosanagar Taluk 9 6 1 1 I 5. Sagar Taluk 35 25 3 2 5 6. Shikaripur Taluk 34 11 1 19 2 1 7. Shimoga Taluk 35 5 2 18 5 4 8. Sorah Taluk 44 11 3 20 1 8 9. Tirthahalli Taluk 2 IX. TUMKUR DISTRICT 273 32 2 81 23 68 18 49 1. Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk 18 5 9 3 2. Gubbi Taluk 50 11 1 15 1 7 6 9 3. Koratagere Taluk 26 4 5 3 8 6 4. Kunigal Taluk 23 4 5 1 3 1 9 5. Madhugiri Taluk 45 7 9 4 18 2 5 6. Pavagada Taluk 9 3 3 1 2 7. Sira Taluk 25 5 7 3 9 8. Taluk 10 4 1 2 3 9. Tumkur Taluk 43 18 3 9 5 7 10. Turuvekcre Taluk 24 10 4 3 2 5 94

TABLE II NUMBER OF VILLAGES ABANDONED BEFORE 1871 AND IN EACH OF THE DECADES FROM 1871 TO 1971

---~- Number abandoned District/ Total------Talnk No. of Before D.1fing During During During During During During During During Du- aban- ring doned 1871 1871- 1881- 1891- 1901- 1911- 1921- 1931- 1941- 1951-1961- villages 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Total for nine districts 785 125 145 40 69 60 85 66 56 65 34 40

I. BANGALORE DISTRICT 60 6 11 2 4 5 5 3 6 7 7 4 1. Talnk 3

2. Bangalore North Taluk S 1

3. Bangalore South Taluk 2 1

4. Channapatna Taluk 3 1 1

S. DevanahaUi Taluk 6

6. Dodda baUapur Taluk 11 2 3 2

7. Hoskote Taluk 8 2 3

8. Kanakapura Taluk 4 2 1

9. Magadi Tal uk 13 2 3 3 2

10. Nelamangala Taluk 5 2

11. Ramanagaram Taluk 95

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to II 12 13

II. CHlKMAGALUR DISTRICT 59 7 7 5 5 8 8 6 5 7

1. Chikmagalur Taluk 7 2

2. Kadur Taluk 31 6 5 4 2 3 2 4 4

3. Kappa Taluk

4. Mudigere Taluk

5. Narasimha- rajapura Taluk ~-

6. Sringeri Taluk 1

7. Tarikere Tal uk 20 2 2 3 5 3 3

III. CHITRADURGA DISTRICT 82 16 28 2 4 5 7 6 6 4 2 2

1. Challakere Taluk 6 2 2

2. Chitradurga Taluk 14 5 2 2 2 I

3. Davangere Taluk 4

4. Harihar Taluk 2

5. Hiriyur Taluk

6. Holalkere Taluk 15 3 6 3 2

7. Hosadurga Tal uk 17 9 2 2

8. Jagalur 3 Taluk 16 8 4

9. Molakalmuru 2 TaJuk 8 2 96

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

IV. HASSAN DISTRICT 90 22 S 4 S 7 6 14 6 5 4 6 I. Alur Taluk 14 3 1 3 4 2. Arkalgud Taluk 13 7 2 1 3. Arsikere Taluk 14 3 2 2 2 2 1 2 4. Belur Taluk 20 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 1 5. Channara- yapatna Taluk 12 5 2 3 6. Hassan Taluk 8 1 2 7. Holenarsipur Taluk 5 3

S. Manjarabad (Saklespur) Taluk 4 2 1

V. KOLAR DISTRICT 142 24 24 7 16 9 20 14 7 8 9 4

1. BagepaUi Taluk 9 4 2 1 1

2. Bangarpet Taluk 12 3 2 2 2 2

3. Chikballapur Taluk 14 5 3 2 2

4. Chintamani Taluk 10 2 2 3 5. Gudibanda Taluk 8 2 1 2 6. Gauribidanur Taluk 11 3 2 3

7. Kolar Taluk 14 2 2 2 3

8. Malur Taluk 17 6 6 2 9. Mulbagal Taluk 20 3 2 2 2 6 2 I

10. S iddlagha tta Taluk 9 2 2 2 11. Srini Vasa pur Taluk 18 2 3 2 2 4 97

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

----~------.~-.--..

VI. MANDYA DISTRICT 40 7 5 4 7 3 2 3 2 4 2 1. Krishnarajpet Taluk 8 3

2. Maddur Taluk 3 3. Taluk 8 2

4. Mandya Taluk 3 3 5. Nagamangala Taluk 6 2 6. Pandavapura Taluk 8 7. Srirangapa tna Taluk 4

VII. MYSORE DISTRICT 63 8 9 2 8 6 9 2 5 9 2 3 I. Chamarajnagar Taluk 5 2. Gundlupet TaIuk 8 2 2 3. Heggadade- vankote Taluk 12 3 3 2 2

4. Hunsur Tuluk 7 2 2 5. Krishnarajnagar Taluk 10 2 2 2 6. Mysore Taluk 5 2 2 7. Nalljangud Taluk 6 2

o.Co Periyapatna Taluk 6 2 1

9. Tirumakudlu Narasipura Taluk 3 2

10. Yclandur Taluk 98

-_ .~---~~-.---~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

_" -----_-_--- ~ ----~-----

VIII. SHIMOGA DISTRICT 140 12 19 10 16 14 20 9 15 15 5 5

1. Bhadravati TaJuk 10 3 2 5

2. Channagiri Taluk 30 2 7 4 5 3 2 6

3. Honnali Taluk 18 3 2 2 2 2 2 3

4. Hosanagar Taluk 2

5. Sagar Taluk 7 3

6. Shikaripur Taluk 22 3 2 3 7 4

7. Shimoga Taluk 25 2 2 4 3 2 3 2 4 2

8. Sorab Taluk 24 3 3 6 3 3 3 9. Tirthahalli TaJuk 2

IX. TUMKUR DISTRICT 109 23 34 4 3 8 9 4 6 3 14

1. Chikkanaya- kanahalli Taluk 10 4 2

2. Gubbi Taluk 14 4 4

3. Koratagere Taluk II 3 4

4. Kunigal Taluk 5 2

5. Madhugiri Taluk 24 4 11 3 2 1

6. Pavagada Taluk 4 3

7. Sir a Taluk 12 3 5

8. Tiptur Taluk 3

9. Tumkur Taluk 17 3 5 2 5 10. Turuvekere Taluk 9 4 2

~-~~---~---,- --- _- ~- ~~------~- 99

Table I shows the classification of uninhabited 188 I and abandoned for the second time bet­ villages and Table II shows the number of villages aban­ ween 1931 and 1941. doned before 1871 and each of the decades from 1871 to (4) Chitradurga District, Holalkere Taluk-Shan­ 1971. Of the 2:165 uninhabited villages in 1971, 288 could bhoganahalli AbandoLcd for the first time bet­ not be covered by the study for want of information. ween 1871 anJ 1881 and again abandoned bet­ Out of the 1977 villages covered by the study, 39 have ween 1941 and 1951. become depopulated on account of the shifting of the residential portion and 10 have become depopulated on (5) Hassan District, Arsikere Taluk-Shanthana­ account of the merger of the residential portions of the haHi villages in the adjoining urban areas. Seven hundred Abandoned for the first time between 187 J and and twenty four villages come under the category 'Never IR8! and abClnrloned again between 1911 and Inhabited'. Seven hundred and eighty five villages 1921. which h.d established settlements were abandoned upto (6) Kolar District, Chintam ,ni Taluk-AmpalJi. 1971. Four hundred and nineteen villages which were Abandoned for the first time between' 87( and uninhabited in 1971 had transient population during 1881 and again abandoned between 1951 and one or more of the censuses between 1871 and 1961. 1961. (7) Kdar District, Srillivaspur Taluk-Basavanatha. Out of the 785 villages with established settlement Abandoned for the first time between 1871 and which had been abandoned by 197!, 125 were aban­ 1881 and abandoned again between 1941 and doned before 1871, 145 in the decade 1871-1881, 40 1951. in the decade 1881-1891,69 in the decade 1891-1901, 60 in the decade 1901-1911,85 in the decade 1911-1921 (8) Mysore District, Heggadadevankote Taluk­ 66 in the decade 1921-1931,56 in the decade 1931-1941 Bettahalli. 65 in the decade 1941-1951, 34 in the decade 1951-1961 Abandoned for the first time between 1871 and and 40 in the decade 1961-1971. 1881 and abandoned again between 1931 and 1941. There are eleven villages which had been abandoned (9) MysOlc District, Mysore Taluk-Lingaumbudi. more than once They are as follows: Abandoned for t!;e first time between 1871 and 1831 and abandoned again between 1961 and (1) Bangalore District, Dcvanahalli Taluk-Lakshmi­ 1971. pura. Abandoned for the first time between 1871 and 1881 and abandoned again cetween (10) Tumkur District, Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk­ 1921 and 1931. Mallenahalli. Abandoned for the first time between 1871 and (2) Chitradurga District, Davanagere Taluk Neela­ 1881 and abandoned again between 1961 and vvanahalli. 1971. Abandoned for the first time between 1871 and 1881 and abandoned again between 1931 and (11) Tumkur di,trict, Sira Taluk-Chikkagiriyana­ halli. 1941. Abandoned for the first time betwe\3ll IS71 and (3) Chitradurga District, Holalkere Taluk-Arlikere. 1881 and ahaudoned again between 1931 and Abandoned for the first time between 1871 and 1941. CHAPTER XIII

SHIFTED AND MERGED VILLACE,S

There are 39 villages which come under the category During the resurvey operations, ali the vlllages which of Shifted Villages and JO villages which come under have been entilCly submerged under the reservoirs will the category of Merged Villages. The dHdhution of be deletcd from the list of villages by the Settlement the shifted villages is as follows: Department. In fae this has been done in Krishnaraja­ Bangalore District 2 nagar Talnk in respect of the villages whi..:h came under Chikmagalur District submersion in the Krishnarajanagar Reservoir but in Mandya District 3 the taluks where survey was done earliet tpe old village Mysore District 2 continue to have a separate existence in records though Shimoga District ... 31 they have ceas d to exist long back.

Shimoga district accounts for the largest num: er <)f MERGED VILLAGES 31 villages under this category. All the'c viliages ate There are only 10 merged villages whieh were de- those whose residential area was shifted on acee ltnt of populated in 1971. They are distributed as follows: the construction of the reservoirs of the Shar::wathi Hydro Electric Project. The next largest nllnlh~r 3 is in Kolar District 4 Mandya District. Of these, two were shifted on account Chitradurga District 3 of the submersion of the residential portions oC the Tumkur District 2 old villages in the Krishnarajasagara Reservoir. The Mysore District ... 1 residential portion of one village (Makankopiu) was The uninhabited villages whose residential areas shifted to the adjoinig inhabited village on health have b, en merged in the adjoining urban areas are a grounds as the old village became malarial comeqlient phe,lOmcnon of tIlll transition from rural to urban on the development of irrigation under the Viwe­ pattern. They cease to exist when the transition phase swaraya Canal. is over and the entire village gets included in the urban Bangalore District and Mysore District ha'ie each area. Ie all the villages wldch have merged in urban got two villages under this C"ltegory. The two shifted areas had continued to have separate existence, thdr villages in Dangalore District came u'ider submersion number would have beel} very much higher especially by the Thippagondanahalli Reservoir constructed for in Bangalore and Mysoie Districts as Bangalore City water supply to Bangalore City. or the two villages in helf covers about 45 of the old villagc:s and Mysore Mysore District, one carne under submersion by the City about 10. As soon as the entire village gets included construction of the Krishnarajasag;lfa Reservoir and in an url'an area, it ceases to have a s;;parate existence tbe other by the construction of the Nugu Reservoir. for census purposes. Only villages which are partly in;;luded in the adjoining urban areas will continue to The single village in Chikmagalur District which have a separate existence until the remaining portion was shifted carne under submer:;io.l by the Bhadra also gets merged in the ever expanding urban arcas. Reservoir Project. So these 10 villages which are shown as merged will in It would be pertinent to mention in th[s connection course of time disappear a~ and when the uninhabited that these shifted villages will continlle to have a sera' portions are grabbed by the urban ,reas for expansion rate existence only until the next Icsurvey operations. of the urban facilities. CHAPTER XIV

There are -2-t "J'_;ever Inhabited" vilh;ges in 1977 25 days in pursuit of the Peshwa; and which enabled tl.c uninhabited villages covered by this study. General Campbeil, after the failure of his Bengal K,_)lar District with; 94 has got the ],vgcst n.ember equipments, to advance upon Ava and bdng the war of villages followed by i\lysore (89), Hassan (85), to a favourable termination. It wa~ also this esta­ Tumkur (3 I), BangalorC! (80), Chitradurga (67), blishment which enab!ed the Duke of Wellington to execute those movements of Ull exampled rapidity Mandy~ (57), Shimoga (48) and Chikmagalur (23). Even a cursory scrutiny of the talukwise iists of these whieh are the admiration of every military man, and ill consideration of whose ser\ ices he recom­ never inhabit;d vill:tge~ wit! show that ,'orests, planta­ tions, amritmahallcavals, nala hantha, and amanikeres mended it to protection in a letter addressed at the close of the war to the Commctnder-in-Chief". occur in this cat':gory in almost all the districts. Fore,ts Allusions in the Wellington Despatches show that do not require any specia 1 explanation. Plant[\tlon~ are the Great Duke often, during the Peninsular War in smslIer area, c0'/ered by affore;;tation r.ctivities. Spain, regretted that he had not the assistance of Tlle Amrit M8hal Kaval is a peculiarity of the old the Amrit Mahal cattle. M~sore State. rh,::,c Kavalt; wen: grazi:lg lands which After the capture of Seringapatam, the Breeu­ were set apart for the Amrit ~.,1aLl Department which ing establisme!lt was entrusted to the native govern­ was cntrm:tcd with tile ta'lk of providing bu:iocks to the ment, and the Public cattle department to an agent; British Commis ;iari.1t. The following extract from the but the inducements whic'l had led Haidar and Tipu Mysore Gazetteer by Lewis Rice 1897 Edition gives a to keep up its efliciel! ryan' catt'e are permitted to graze Nala Hanthas and Arnanikeres generally comprise certain fixed pJrliJ:1<;, alld after the Governme:lt c.lttle irrigable 1ands. Nala Hanthas comprise irrigable lands have left for their annual vis its to the jungles, the shcrve under channels dra" i1 from rivers or major reservoirs gars are permitteJ to sell some part of the grazing, and while Amadikeres co:nprlse lands irrigated by smaller from the funds thus obta[ned the kavalga.rs or gU:lrds reservoirs. The irriga Jc lands and some of the other are plid and other expense; met. This privilege ceases adjoining lands ha ,'e been treated as independent at the end of July each year. vilJages and given the name of the adjoining residential villages with the word 'Amanikere' or 'Nala Hantha' The Amrit Mahal cattle comprise three varie­ added. ties, called the , Hagalvadi and Chitaldroog, from the districts which originally produced them, Forests, plantations and Amritmahal Kavals gene­ and may be readily distinguished from every other rally come under the category of villages constituted breed in India by the peculiar shape and beauty of so1ely for Survey purposes. Residential settlement was their heads and the symmetry of their form. They not permitted in these villages as the entire land was seldom attain an extraordinary height, but in pro­ reserved for Government usc. It is not therefore nece­ portion to their size are remarkably deep and wide ssary to make a special study to determine th! reasons in the chest, long and broad in the back, round in for these villages n(!ver having had any popUlation. the barrel, well ribbed up and strong in the shoulder and limb. They are active, fiery, and walk faster Nala Hanthas and Amanikeres arc generally found than troops; in a word, they seem to constitute a in areas where the proportion of irrigated land was distint species. and possess the same superiority small and the pcople preferred to utilise the entire over other bullocks, in every valuable quality, that command area for irrigation and reside in the higher thoroughbreds do over other horses. The cows of lands beyond t!1c reach of irrigation. Also due to the this breed are white, but the malcs have generally p:mcity of irrigated lands, the irrigated lands were held an admixture of blue over the fore and hind by persons from all the surrounding villages. Hence quarters. There is a fourth variety of coloured these were treated as independent villages instead of cattle, which are considered inferior to the white in being merged in the adjoining villages which gave the energy and perseverance, though they rather surpass name to the Nala Hantha or Amanikere. As explained them in size. As the former breed is the most perfect later, the rules for constitution of villages during survey that is known, it would only tend to its deterioration and settlement have also contributed to many of thes.: to cross it with any other, and the bulls are accor­ appendages of residential villages being treated as dingly bred in the best herds, and individuals, selec­ independent villages. ted from the best specimens, distributed to improve Out of the 724 never inhabited villages, 155 come the breeds in the other herds." under the category of plantations, forests and Amrit­ According to a printed note prepared in 1873 and maha] Kavals. Another 69 come under the category of available in the Archives of the Karnataka Government Nala Hanthas and Amanikeres. This leaves a round Secretariat there were 408 Amrit Mahal Kavals ill 1837. number of 500 villages in re,pect of which no satisfac­ This number had come down to 208 by 1897. tory explanation for their never having been inhabited It is also interesting to note that the administration of is available After a detailed scrutiny, I have come to these kavals of the Amrit Mahal Department was part­ the conclu,ion that these villages wo uid not normally of the Military Establishment of the State Goverment qualify to be indepcnuent villages but were constituted and not part of the Animal Husbandry Establisment. into separate villages at th~ time of survey and settle- 103 ment on account of the fact that the cultivated lands officer that the agrcement has been obtained by in these villages were held by pt'fsons rC',jeiing in more fruad intimidation, or any other illegal means. than one of the surrounding adjoining \'i;l:lges and there was resi5tance to include ill a sin_;le village the Rule 2.-Ifthe patds and other village officers, and, lands held by persons rcsi,jing in a number of villages. in the case of an alienated village, the holder there­ of or his duly constituted agent, do :lot agree to fix The total areJ. of these ::00 never inhabited villages the boundaries of their respective vi llages in the excluding those comin'; under the category of others manner prescribed in the preceding rule, or if it (i.e. excluding forests, plantations, amritmahal kava Is shall appear to the said omcer that the agreement nala hanthas and amanikeres) is 1,81,2]1) acres giving has been obtained by fraud, intimidation or any an average of 362 acres per village. The total rural area other illegal means, Of if there be any pending dis­ covered by the 19,147 villages included in the 9 districts pute, the said officer shall make a survey and plan covered by the study is 75,648 Sq, Kms. giving an of the ground in dispute, exhibiting the land claimed average of 345 hectares or 971 acres per village. Hence by thc contending parties, and all particulars rela­ the "never inhabited" villages coming under the ting thereto, and shall hold a formal enquiry into category of "others" comprise less than one half of the claims of the said parties, and thereafter make the extent of the normal villages in the State. There an award in the case. If either of the villages concer­ is no justification for their being constituted into separate ned be alienated, an award made by a survey officer villages. The position is the same even at the district shall, unless the officer making it be the Superinten­ level as would be clear from Table III. In all the 9 dis­ dent of Survey, be subject to his confirmation." tricts, the average area of a vi!Iage coming under the category "never inhabited villages-others"-is less than The boundaries of the villages were settled mostly one half of the average area of all the villages in the by mutual agreement among all the villages concerned district. The same state of aITair, will be found at the and as far as possible the traditional boundaries have taluk level except in Manjarabad (Saklespur) Taluk been continued during the survey and settlement. There which however has only two out of the 500 villages has been no attempt at rationalisation of either the coming under the category "Never Inhabited-Others", boundaries or of the area included in any particular Hence, the conclusion is inescapable that these 500 village. The 500 villages which had never had any hu­ villages coming under the category of others were cons­ man settlements have been continued as independent tituted as independent villages on extraneous grounds villages during survey arld settlement only on the ground though on grounds of viability they do not deserve to that they had continued as such even prior to the intro­ be constituted into independent villages. duction of survey arld settlement. If all the lands in these uninhabited village:; had been held by persons The provisions of the Mysore Land Revenue Code residing in a single adjoining villag~, they would cer­ of 1888 which codify the principles on which villages tainly have been included in that village but as normally were constituted at the time of survey and settlement the cultivated lands in such villages are held by persons are reproduced below: residing in all the surrounding villages, the inclusion of "Sec, 126, The boundaries of villages situated in the these lands in anyone village would have been objected territories of Mysore shall be fixed, and all disputes to by the people of the adjoining villages. Each village relating thereto shall be determined, by surv!'y om­ has certain co nmon grazing land~ and other lands avai­ cers, or by such other officers as may be nominated lable for common use and if an uninhabited village in by Government for the purpose, who shall be guided which the residents of a number of surrounding villages by the following rules:-- have got an interest is merged in anyone of the villages, Rule I.-When the patels and other village officers the people of the remaining villages stand to loss the of any two or more adjoining villages, and, in the user of the common grazing lands and also the right to case of an alienated village, the holder thereof or his take the usufruct of trees in Government lands and lea­ duly constituted agent, shall voluntarily agree to any ves for manure etc. I have therefore come to the Con­ given line of boundary as the boundary common to clusion that these 500 villages whose average area is their respective villages. the officer determining the very much smaller than one half of the average area of boundary shall require the said parties to execute an the villages in the State were continucd as independent agreement to that effect, and shall the mark off the villages so that there may be no interference with the boundary in the manner agrced upon, !\nd any enjoy;uenl of the common and other lands in such village boundary flxed in this manner shall be held villages by the residents of all the adjoining villages, to be finally settled, unles, it shall appear to the said who held lands in such uninhabited vil1ages. 104

---~- _-- -__ ------TABLE III 2 3 - --_ --~~------_------Average area per 'never-inhabited' village exclu­ ding Forests, Plantations, Amrit Mahal Kavals, 5. Hiriyur T:l'uI, 2193 2662 Nala hanthas and Amanikeres compared to the 6. Holdkere TaJuk 54': 1342 average area per village of all villages in a Dis­ 7. Hosadurga Tall'lc 520 1495 trict/Taluk 8. Jagalur TdLlk 822 1 \9 2 9. Mo'akalmuru District/Talnk Average area per Average Tal11k 'ne\e~-inhabited,' ar·:a per village other tban village of 647 forests, plantations, all vi!lages IV. HASSAN Dl~;nUCT 317 Amrit Mahal in the Kavals, ["ala Han- District! 1. Alur Taluk 66 404 thas and Amanikeres Talnk 2. Arkalgud Taluk 223 546 845 (In acres) (In acres) 3. Arsikere Taluk :'97 4. Helm Taluk 112 538 2 3 5. Channarayapatna 659 Ta' uk 36 r. BANGALORE DISTRICT 236 700 6. Hassan 'l";;:lck 201 572 L Anekal Taluk 318 5S3 7. Holenarsip~r Talnk 202 590 2. Bangalore North 8. Ivlanjarabad Taluk 152 484 (Sakle~pur) '~-aluk 1763 1115 3. BangaJore South 225 603 Taluk 162 574 V. KOLAR DISTRICT 4. Channapatna Taluk 168 600 1. Hagep;:;l:i Taluk 199 996 5. Devar,ahalli Taluk 175 523 2. Baugarpet Tah}]( 150 570 6. D()ddaball

~------2 3 2 3 4. Hosanagar Taluk The single never- VII. MYSORE DISTRICT 558 1297 inhabited village in 1. this Taluk is a Chamarajnagar Forest Taluk 700 1600 5. Sagar Taluk 77 1807 2. Gundlupet Taluk 633 2131 6. Shikaripur Taluk 398 1250 3. Heggadadevankote 7. Shimoga Taluk 264 1177 Taluk 576 1401 8. Sorab Taluk 192 918 4. Hunsur Taluk 541 1036 9. Tirthahalli Taluk No village in the 5. Krishnarajnagar category 'never- inhabited Taluk 492 832 6. Mysore Taluk 391 1167 IX. TUMKUR DISTRICT 364 952 7. Nanjangud Taluk 635 1278 1. Chiknayakanhalli 8. Periyapatna Taluk 172 990 Taluk 769 1164 9. Tirumakudlu Narsi- 2. Gubbi Taluk 256 864 pura Taluk 307 1089 3. Koratagere Taluk 166 635 10. Yelandur No village in the 4. Kunigal Taluk 394 753 category "never inhabited" 5. Madhugiri Taluk 401 857 6. Pavagada Taluk 737 2300 vm. SHIMOGA DISTRICT 324 1291 7. Taluk 828 1524 Tiptur Taluk 129 1. Bhadravati Taluk 486 1031 8. 832 Tumkur Taluk 2. Channagiri Taiuk 453 1214 9. 224 630 3. HonnaH Taluk 4:'9 1264 10. Turuvekere Taluk 205 783 CHAPTER XV

ABANDONED VILLAGES correspunding ligures for the full number of uninhabi­ ted villages the figures for N, A.I. plus A Il.A. plus There are 785 villages which had an established A II B. and T were all multiplied by 74/66. The correc­ s~ttlcment and which have been abandoned upto the ted figures would be 34 for N plus M plus S 19 for Census of 197 J. Kolar District accounts for the laroest A 1. plus A.II.A plus A 1I.B and 21 for T. As the taluk number viz. 112 Next in the order are Shimoga (140), had a total of 290 ini1'lb:tcd villages in 1971. the number Tumkur (109), Hassan (90), Chitradurga (82), Mysorc of ever inhabited villages would be 290 plus 19 plus 21 (63), Bangalore (6()), Cbikmagalur :,5')), and Mandya or :30. Nineteen abandoned villages as against 330 (40). However, having regard to the wide vari~ltion in ever inhabited vi]i3gcs would give a percentage of 5.76. the number of villages in each district or taluk, tbe The percentage has been worked out for each taluk, comparison of the actml number of abandoned villages district and the State in the above manner and is con­ in each district or taluk would not be a reliable indica­ tained in Table IV. For the Stale as a whole the abando­ tion of the incidence of these abandoned villages. I have ned villages constitute 4.89~~ of ever inhabited villages therefore tried to evolve a new parameter for compari­ son and this is tbe percentage of "Ever Inhabited" Shimoga District w;th ~.92~~ has the largest inci­ villages in a taluk or distric( treated as abandoned. "Ever Inhabited" villages are those which had some uenre of abandoned viilages while Bangalore with 3.09% population at some time or otlier. I have, however, has the smallest. In between come Chitradurga (6.49%), Chikmagalur (6 09%), Kolar (5.14%), Tumkur (4.67%), thought it fit to exclude the villages coming under the Mysore (4.19%), Hassan (3 64%) and Mandya (3.10%). category of shifted villages and merged villages from the number of ever inhabited Villages as the shifting The incidence (Of abandoned villages is higher than the average for the nine districts p.89%) in Shimoga, and merger have been brought about by extraneous Chitradurga, Chikmagalur and Kolar Districts. In action and not by the interplay of natural forces. So the Tumkur, Mysore, Hass8n, Mandya and Bangalore total number of ever inhabited villages in any taluk would be the sum total of villages coming under the Districts the incidence of abandoned villages is lower category of A.I, A.Il.A, A.II B. and T, added to the than the average for tile nine districts. number of inhabited villages in 1971. Out of the 82 taluks covered by this study, the In view of the fact that the percentages of uninhabi­ incidence of abandoned villages IS higher than the ted villages covered by the study varies from taluk to average of 4.89% for all the nine districts, in the taluk depending on the number of villages which had following 33 taluks: to be excluded from the study fOf want of information, 1. Channagiri 16.7~~ I have considered it necessary to work out the number of villages which would have come under the categories 2. Shikaripur 13.41 % "never inhabited" and "ever inhabited" if information 3. Kadur 12.97% had been available for all the Ull inhabited Villa "es 4. Honnali 12.96% recorded during the 1971 Census. Thus, if out 0/25 5. Shimoga 12.75~,~ uninhabited villages in a taluk, 20 were covered by the 6. Jagalur 12 I ~{ study and 5 were left out for want of j llformation, the 7. Molakalmuru 10.22% number of villages coming under each category for the 8. Hosadurga taluk as a whole is taken to be 5/4 or 125% of the 9.35~/~ figures actually shown against the taluk in Table I 9. Madhugiri 9.06% rounding off to the nearest whole number and the per~ 10. Chitradurga 8.99~:~ centage of abandoned villages to the ever inhabited 11. Holalkere 8.51% villages is worked out on the basis of these corrected 12. Gudibanda 8.51% figures. The following example will make it clear: Malur 13. Tarikere 8.47~,; taluk in Kolar District had 74 uninhabited villages. Of these only 66 are covered by the study as information 14. Sorab 8.16~{ was not available for the remaining 8 villages. Hence 15. Gundlupet 7.48% the fi~ures .found in Table I relate to 66/74 or 89% of 16. Belur 7.20% the unmhabIted villages in Malur taluk. To get the 17. Mu1bagal 6.95% 107

18. Alur 6.56% 1. Maddur 2.52% 19. Doddaballapur 6.38% 2. Nelamangala ~.57% 20. Krishnarajanagar 6.25% 3. Chintamani 2.76% 21. Sira 6.25% 4. Chamarajnagar 2.80~~ 22. Srinivasapur 6.25% 5. Pavagada 2.84% 23. Bhadravati 6.06~~ 6. Hassan 2.89% 24. Chikballapur 5.88/~ 7. Bangalore North 2.94~~ 25. Malur 576% 8. Davanagere 2.98 y,; 26. Gauribidanur 5.73% 9. Sagar 2.98/~ 27. Arkalgud 5.71% 10. Periyapatna 3.05~~ 28. Gubbi 5.54~~, II. Chikmagalur 3.07% 29. 5.51% 12. Mysore 3.23 /'~ 30. Arsikere 5.35% 13. Krishnarajpet 3.29% 31. Koratagere 5.31/., 14. Nanjangud 3.35% :2. Pandavapura 5.03!~ 15. Challakere 3.35% 33. Kolar 4.9 I i~ 16. Devanballi 3.50% Kolar District with 7 such taluks has the largest 17. Hunsur 3.57/,; number followed by Shimoga (6), Chitradurga (5), 18. Yelandur 3.57% Hassan (4), Tumkur (4), Mysore (3), Chikmagalur (2), 19. Channarayapatna 3.66~~ Mandya (1) and Bangalore (1). 20. Turuvekere 3.86% In the remaining 49 taluks the incidence of abando­ 21. Siddlaghatta 3.92~'~ ned villages is below the overall average of 4.89% for 22. Hoskote 3.99% the nine districts covered by this study. Five taluks 23. Bagepalli 4.11% namely R amanagaram, Koppa, Mudigere, Narasim­ 24. Bangarpet 4.21% harajapura and Hiriyuf do not have any abandoned 25. Chikkanaikanhalli villages. 4.3n~ 26. Malavalli 4.44% In TirthahaJli (0 81 %), Bangaiore South (0.93/,,) 27. Srirangapatna 4.44% and Hosanagar (0.99%) Taluks the incidence of abando­ 28. Tumkur ned villages is less than one percent. In twelve taluks 4.51/~ 29. Magadi the incidence of abandoned villages is more than One 4.59?1o per cent but less than 2 5 per cent These taluks are: I have made an attempt to find out if the incidence 1.32i:' of abandoned villages is in any way related to (1) the 1. Tiptur incidence of Malaria and (2) the precarious nature of 2. Kanakapura 1.65~~ agriculture in the drought affected areas. 3. Nagamangala 1. 71 ~~ In the former princely State of Mysore, Malaria 1.79% 4. Manjarabad was endemic in a severe from in the following malnad (Saklespur) taluks: 5. Kuniga\ 1.95% 1. Shimoga 2. Shikaripur 6. Sringeri 2.04% 3. Sorab 4. Sagar 7. Channapatna 2.17% 5. Hosanagar 6. Tirthahalli 8. Mandya 225% 7. Ch ikmagalur 8. Koppa 9. Anekal 2.30%, 9. Narasimharajapura 10. Sringeri 10. Tirumakudlunar asipura 2.31/., 11. Mudigere 12. Tarikcre 11. Ho1enarsipura 2.31 I:' 13. Alur 14. Belur 2.47% 12. Harihar 15. Manjarabad 16. Arkalgud

In 29 taluks the incidence of abandoncu villages IS (Saklespur) 17. Hunsur bctween 2.5% and 4.89%. The;c are: 18. Periyapatna 19. Heggadadevankote 108

After the advent of irrigation under the Vanivilas 5. Jagalur* 6. Hosadurga '" Sagar, Malaria become prevalent in Hiriyur TaJuk. 7. Chitradurga * 8. Holalkerc* Similarly it appeared in a virulant from in the taluks 9. Hosakote 10. DoddabaUapur* of Mandya, Maddur, Malavalli, Sril'angapatna and Pandavapur.l of Mandya District aCter irrigation deve­ 11. Nelamangala 12. Kanakapura loped under the Visweswariah Cana). There were thus 13. Magadi 14. Ramanagaram 2S taluks where Malaria was endemic. Out of these 2S 15. Anekal 16. Devanahalli taluks, only nine namdy Shikaripur, Shimoga, Tarikere, 17. Channapatna 18. Channarayapatna Sorab, Belur, Alur, Arkalgud, Heggadadevankote and 19. Arsikerc'" 20. Holenarasipur Pandavapura have got incidence of abandoned villages 21. Srinivaspur* 22. Gudibanda * higher than the overall average for the nine districts covered by the study. Out of seven taluks having an 23. Chikballapllr* 24. Gauribidnur* incidence of more than 10% of abandoned villages, 25. BagepaUi 26. KoJar'" only two namely Shikaripur and Shimoga were endemic 27. llangarpet 28. Chintamani areas for Malaria. Four out of the five taluks having 29. Mulbagal* 30. Malur* no abandoned villages at all. are those which wcre 31. Madhugiri* 32. Sira* endemic for Malaria. Two out of the three: taluks whe;'e 33. TUfuvekere the incidence of abandoned villages is less than 1 ~~ 34. Tiptur were endemic for Malaria. The proportion of talllks 35. Kunigal 36. Pavagada with a high incidence of abandoned villages is 9/25 37. Chiknaikanhalli 38. Koragagere'" (36%) for the taluks which were endemic for Malaria 39. Gubbi'" 40. Chamarajnagar and this is lower than 33/82 which is the pro· (40~~) 41. Hunsur 42. Gundlupet* portion for all the nine districts covered by the study. 43. Nanjangud 44. T. Narsipur The 25 taluks where Malaria was endemic have in 45. Periyapatna 46. Malavalli all 5051 villages or 26.38% of the villages in the 82 47. Krishnarajpet 48. Nagamangala taluks covered by this study. The number of abandoned 49. Panda vapura '" villages in these 25 taluks is 212 which is 2n~ of the total number of abandoned villages for all the 82 taluks. Tn the 20 taluks marked by '" in the above list the inci­ There are therefore no grounds to conclude that the dence of abandoned villages is highcr than the overall incidence of abandoned viJiages is higher in the areas average of 4.89% for the 82 taluks covered by the study. where Malaria was endemic. T11e percentage of drought affected taluks with a high incidence of abandoned villages is 40.8. For the nine For examining whether thc incidence of abandoned districts as a whole, the percentage oftaluks with a high villages is higher in the: drought affected areas, I have incidence of abanooned villages is 40.24. Out of the adopted the list of drought affected taluks contained seven taluks where the inCidence of abandoned villages in Appendix B.1 of Vol. I of the Report the Irrigation is higher than 10~1.: only two namely Jagalur amI Mola­ Commission, ),972. It is cxplained in the report that the kalmuru are drought affected taluks. Commission accepted the definition of drought furnished The 49 taluks identified as areas affected by drought by the India Meteorological Department, according to comprise a total number of 12,220 villages, accounting which drought is the situation occurring in any area for 64% of the total number of villages in the areas when the annual rainfull is less than 75 % of the nor­ covered by the study. These 49 taluks however contain mal. Areas where drought has occurred as defined only 454 out of the 785 abandoned villages or 58% of above in 20 per cent of tile years examined, are consi­ the abandoned villages. It would therefore appear that dered drought areas thus drought areasare arcas where the incidence of abandoned villages is not higher in the there is 20 per cent probability of rainflllJ departures of drought affected areas than in the areas which are not more than (-) 25% from the normal. Taluks where SUbject to drought. 30 per cent of the cropped area is irrigated arc exclu­ ded from the list of drought areas. Table n shows the number of villages which were The following 49 taluks out of the 82 cove-red by abJndoned before 1871 and in each of the decades from this study have been listed as drought areas by the Irri­ 1871 to 1971. It is seen that the largest numberofaban­ gation Commission: doned villages occurred during the decade 1871-1881 when 145 villages (almost 20% out of a total of 739 1. Challakere 2. Hiriyur villages were abandoned. The princely State of Mysore 3. Davangere 4. Molakalmuru* had a severe famine between 1875 and 1878 when it lOy was estimated tllat more than one million people died. The permanent ellcct of this famine is seen in the 145 Proportion of Abandoned village which got abandoned during the decade 1871 to District/Taluk villages to 1S81. Even the 125 villages which had been abandoned ., ever-inha bited" prior to 1871 must have been abandoned as a result of villages the earlier f~mines which, however, were not equal to the great famine of 1875 -1878 in severity. 4. Channapatna Taluk 2.71% 5. DevanahaUi Taluk 3.50% The next largest number of abandoned villages is 6. Doddaballapur Taluk found in the decade 1911 -1921 when 85 villages were 6.38% abandoned. This can be traced to the effect of the in­ 7. Hoskote Taluk 3.99% fluenza epidemic during 1917-1918. The eftect of this 8. Kanakapura Taluk 1.65% are most noticeable in the districts of Shimoga and 9. Magadi Taluk 4.59% Kolar. Actually it is these districts which show a reduc­ 10. Nelamangala Taluk 2.57% tion in population between 1911 and 1921. ~The plague 11. Ramanagaram Taluk Nil epidemic does not appear to have left any permanent impress in the shape of abandoned villages. This is II. CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT 6.09% probably due to the fact that plague was more lethal I. Chikmagalur Taluk 3.07% in the crowded urban areas and the larger villages 2. Kadur Taluk having thickly populated areas. Even though there had 12.97% 3. Koppa Taluk been considerablc mortality in these areas, tbey wcre too Nil big to be abandoned completely and the smaller villages 4. Narasimbarajapura Taluk Nil where the residential pattern was not so overcroweded 5. Mudigere Taluk Nil appear to have escaped comparatively lightly in the 6. Sringeri Taluk 2.04% plague epidemic. 7. Tarikere Taluk 8.47% Except for the marked increase the number of aban­ III. CHfTRADURGA DISTRICT 6.49% doned villages in the decade 1871-1881 on account of the great famine and between 1911-1921 on account of 1. Challakere Taluk 3.35% the influenza epidemic, tbere is not much variation from 2. Chitradurga Taluk 8.99% decade to decade until 1941-1951. There is a sharp fall 3. Davanagere Taluk 2.98% in the decades 1951-1961 and 1961-1971. The compara­ 4. Harihar Taluk 2.47/~ tive decrease in the incidence of abandoned villages in 5. Hiriyur Taluk the two decades 1951-1961 and 1961-1971 may partly Nil be due to the improvement in the conditions of the 6. Holalkere Taluk 8.51/~ cultiVating population due to the better price structure 7- Hosadurga Taluk 9.35% that became available during the War and subsequent to 8. Jagalur Taluk 12.1 % independece. 9. Molakalmuru Taluk lO.22~,~

TABLE IV IV. HASSAN DISTRICT 3.64% INCIDENCE OF ABA]'\DONED VILLAGES 1. Alur Taluk 6.56% 2. Arkalgud Taluk 5.71~~ DistrictjTaluk Proportion of 3. Arsikere Taluk 5.35% Abandoned 4. Belur Taluk villages to 7.2 % "ever-inhabited" 5. Channayarapatna Taluk 3.66% villages 6. Hassan Taluk 2.89% 7. Holenarasipur Taluk 2.31% Total for nine Districts 4.89% 8. Manjarabad (Saklespur) Taluk 1.79% I. BANGALORE DISTRICT 3.09% V. KOLAR DISTRICT 5.14% 1. Anekal Taluk 2.30% 1. Bagepalli Taluk 4.11% 2. Bangalorc North Taluk 2.94% 2. Bangarpet Talukl 4.2Io~ 3. Bang2.Iore South TaIllk 0.93% 3. Chikballapur Taluk 5.88% 110

Proportion of Proportion of District/Taluk Abandoned Abandone1 villages to District/Taluk villages to "ever-inhabited" "ever-inhabited" villages villages

4. Chintamani Taluk 2.76% 8. Periyapatna Taluk 3.05% 5. Gauribidnur Taluk 5.73% 9. Tirumakudlu Narsipura Taluk 2.31 '1~ 6. Gudibanda T aluk 8.51~~ 10. Yelandur Taluk 3.57~; 7. Kolar Taluk 4.96% VIII. SHIMOGA DISTRICT 8. Malur Taluk 5.76% 7.92% 9. Mulbagal Taluk 6.95% 1. Bhadravati Taluk 6.06% 10. Siddlaghatta Taluk 3.92% 2. Channagiri Taluk 16.17% 11. Srinivaspur Taluk 6.25% 3. Honnali Taluk 12.96% VI. MANDYA DISTRICT 3.10~~ 4. Hosanagar T~,: lk 0.99% 5. Sagar Talllk 2.98% 1. Krishnarajpet Ta1uk 3.29~, 6. Shikaripur TaJuk 13.41 ;: 2. Maddur Taluk 2.52%

7. Shimoga Taluk 12.75/0 3. Malavalli Taluk 4.44;:, 8. Sorab Taluk 4. Mandya Taluk 2.25% 8.16~~ 9. Tirtbahalli Taluk 0.81% 5. Nagamangala Taluk 1-71% 6. Pandavapura Taluk 5.03% IX. TUMKUR DISTRICT 4.67% 7. Srirangapatna Taluk 4.44% 1. Chiknaikanahalli Taluk 4.37:%'. VIlI. MYSORE DISTRICT 4.19% 2. Gubbi Taluk 5.54/~ (excluding KollegaJ Taluk) 3. Koratagere Taluk 5.31% 1. Chamarajnagar Taluk 2.80;,; 4. Kunigal Taluk 1.95% 2. Gundlupet Taluk 748/:' 5. Madhugiri Taluk 9.06/~ 3. Heggadadevankote Taluk 5.51% 6. Pavagada Taluk 2.84~~ 4. Hunsur Taluk 3.57% 7. S ira Taluk 6.25/~ 5. Krishnarajanagar Taluk 6.25/~ 8. Tiptur Taluk l.:n/; 6. Wysore Taluk 3.23% 9. Tumkur Taluk 4.51/;' 7. Nanjangud Taluk 3.35% 10. Turuvekere Taluk 386% CHAPTER XVI

VILLAGES WITH TRANSIENT POI'ULATION

There arc 419 such villages in all the 9 districts DURING THE CE~TURY 1871-1>71: covered by the study Kolar district ac~ounts for 96 of As mentioned earlier, tbere art" II such villages. them followed by Chitradurga (56), i\lysore (53), They are found in all tbe districts except Ctlikmagalur, Tumkur (49), Bangalore (48), Mandya (34), Hassan (34), Mandya and Shimoga. It is, however, interesting that Chikmagalur (27) and Shimoga (22). Out of these 419 all the taluks except Mysore and H~ggadadevanakote villages, 66 come under the category of forests, plant­ where these villages abandoned more than once are ations and Amrit Mahal Kavals and 34 under the cate­ found are listed as drought affected taluks by the gory of Amanikere and Nala Hantba villages. This Irrigation Commission. I would have very much liked leaves a balance of 319 coming under the category of to have visited these 11 villages abandoned more tban others. once and made local enquiries regarJing the circum­ stances which led to their repopulation afrer tbe initial The transient population found in forests and plant­ abandonment and again their second abandonment. But ations most probably pertains to the workers who were such an investigation has to be ruled out because I am engaged in afforestation activities or in the exploitation otherwise too preocupied to undertake it. I hope of forest produce and were assigned to the forest or some younger research workers will interest themselves plantation as such under the old system of enumerating in this problem and prepare detailed case studies about a person where he is found on the single day of enumer­ the abandonment, repopulation and second abandon­ ation. The transient popUlation in Amrit Mahal Kavals ment of these villages. comprises persons who were looking after the herds of An interesting feature is that ten out of the eleven cattle during their movement between Hunsur and villages were abandoned for the first time during the Ajjampur which were the two main stations. The tran­ decade 1871·1881 i.e. the 'decade of the great famine. sient population in Nala Hanthas and Amanikere Only one village, Bettahalli in Heggadadevakote Taluk villages probably relates to the persons who were pre Was abandoned for the first time during the decade paring jaggery out of sugarcane. To avoid tbe difficulty 1881-1891. The second abandonment, however, does not and heavy cost of transporting sugarcane the jaggery indicate such a common pattern. Shanthanahalli in pans are set up in the midst of the sugarcane fields Arsikere Taluk of Hassan District was abandoned for themselves and only the prepared jaggery is taken out the second time during the decade 1911·1921. Lakshmi­ of the field. During jaggery seasons the person engaged pura in Devanahalli Taluk of Bangalore District was in the manufacture of jaggery reside in the temporary abandoned for the second time between 1921 and 1931. huts sheltering the jaggery pan and sugarcane mill. The Arlikere of Holalkere Taluk and Neelavvanahalli of jaggery season generally starts after the monsoons and Davanagere Taluk, both of Chitradurga District and jaggery boiling will go on during the montbs of January, Chikkagiriyanahalli in Sira Taluk of Tumkur District February and March. The people engaged in jaggery and Bettaballi in Heggadadevankote Taluk of Mysore boiling would have been enumerated in the Amanikere District were abandoned for the second time during the and Nala Hantha viUages under the old system of decade 1931-1941 which is the decade of the great recording the person in the actual place where he is agricultural depression. Shanbhoganahalli of Holalkere found on the single day of enumeration. Taluk in Chitradurga District, Basavanatba of Sriniv­ aspur Taluk in Kolar District were ab-andoned between The presence of transient popUlation in the remain­ 1941 and 1951 for the second time. Ampalli of Chint­ ing 319 villages coming under the category of "Others" amani Taluk in Kolar District was abandoned for the is not however capable of such ready explanation. Only second time during the decade 1951·196l and Limgam­ visits to the locality and local enquiries may locate the budi of Mysore Taluk in MYsore District was aband­ reason for these villages being populated during some oned for the second time during the decade 1961-71. It of the periods between 1871 and 1971. would therefore appear that the agricultural depression in the thirties was an important factor leading to the VILLAGES ABANDONED MORE THAN ONCE second abandonment of some of the villages. CHAPTER XVII

CONCLUSION

This study has been a macro study of the uninha­ had the influ;nza epidemic accounts fM the next largest bited villages of the districts comprising the former number of abandoned villages and th.:: effect of this princely State of Mysore. As such it has dealt with the epidemic is marked in the two districts of Shimoga and broad classification of these villages and the pattern of KoJar. The study does not indicate any visible impact distribution of villages which had establised settlements of plague epidemic on the abandonment of village3_ The at one time and which had been abandoned by 1971- abandonment appears to have slowed down subsequent The ;patial distribution of the abandoned villages bas to 1951 probably on account of the comparatively pro­ been studied to find out whether the incidence of sperous condition of the agriculturists, malaria and the susceptibility of a particular taluk to drought have had any impact on the abandonment of A micro study of the abandoned villages would be the villages and conclusion in both cases has been very exciting and interesting and each abandoned negative namely that the incidence of malaria or the village may have its own story to tell as Gold Smith's susceptibility to drought have not resulted in any Deserted Village Aburn had, A study of this magnitu­ noticeable increase in the incidence of abandoned de is certainly beyo!1d my limited capacities and at my villages. A studl' of the number of villages which were age I cannot take up too mUch of physical exertion also. abandoned during each decade has indicated that I shall be satisfied if this monograph provokes an the great famine of 1975-78 contributed the largest interest in the furtlier study of these abandoned villages num ber of abandoned villages and that it~ effects were and will inspire a band of research workers to take up felt in all the nine districts. The decade 191 1-1921 which micro study of some of the abandoned villages. i." -,7.' 241 12 0 24 •• 72 MILES ~F4 !,.....,~! 20 0 20 .to 60 eo 100 I(ILOMETPE$ NUMBER OF NEVER-INHABITED AND ABANDONED VILLAGES IN EACH DISTRICT AND THE INTENSITY OF OIS'TRICT NET WORK OF ROADS - (

OF ROADS

Mort: thon SO kms of rood • per 100 Sq. ~ms It'

~ BctwUfl 40 tuns & 50 kms. ~ of rood pl!'f 100 Sq. ~ms

~ Between 30 kms.& 40 kms ~ of road per 100 Sq. kms

t====l Less than 30 kms. of I.' C=j rood p~r tOO Sq. kms 16'

Each triangle rcrprCl'sctnts 10

• EcCh dot represt'l'lts 10 ne'Jcr ·inhcbitcd villo~u IS

ANDHRA PRADESH I.'

I.

I"

TAMIL NADU

u." E. OF GREENWICH 77 18 7.

..... llpoll 5"'"1 oflndl. m.,. wllh til' ..,," ..r~n 01 Th, t."lto,lll .,Ct,. 0' 1"11 __•• 'lito eM _ to 1 d,fUnu of ,,,-511,,,eyor Gttl.,~ of 11•• 11 , ..."" 1Miltlc.tl1ll11u __'" ,,...tM~""II'. 2. 12 0 24 A8 72 MILES t;!;;;~'li~a=~~'H~~H~;;;;j' 20 0 -20 "0 60 eo 100 KII.. OMETRES ,NUMBER OF NEVER-INHABITED'AND ABANDONED VILLAGES IN EACH DISTRICT AND THE PERCENTAGE OF OISTRICT AREA UNDER FOREST ,t(

~ Forests covering bdween ~ 5% & 10% 01 the area

r==:==l Forests coverin

#. Each triangle flit presents 10 abandoned viUo9cS

Eoeh dot represents 10 ,.: • ncyt:r-inhobitrd villages

aned "pOI'l Sun.., "I i~d,. map With \11. ~U""nIM of The. terrltorl,1 Wlur, of India eKte~c Into thl I ... tA. dlltJIIU crt ,h. $\lrHrO' Gln,n.1 "" India. ~wc!~e n,,,tl~.1 mil .. ...,Iuur.d from the Ipp'Op.11Ul1t-. 11,,1 2 4 12 0 24 48 7 MILES ; ~I • 1""'""1 1""'""1 r MAP SHOWING THE INCIDENCE OF 20 0 2 0 40 60 80 100 KILO ... ! T RES ABANDONED VILLAGES AND THE /- '~-..../ STATE BOUNDARY TALUKS WORST AFFECTED BY ( "",,1., .. , < DISTRI CT .. ' - ._._,_. TA~UIl .. .,." , .. \ .. PLAGUE BETWEEN 1896 :~ 1911 ( '~;~~r-C~~~

{' "'\._ ., ...... ,i .. \ ...... :, .. .~:.: ,J4 PERCENTAGE OF' ABANDONED VILLAGES

MAHARASHTRA 15 -00 AND ABOVE \

,,:'>' ::r:::'{' "',' ,".:1 10' 00 - 14 ' 99

2 , 0 0 - 4 99

1 -00- 1 - 99

BELOW 1 00

NIL

PLAGUE AFFECTED TALUKS

«' i .

TAMIL NADU

.....~ "POI"I Swr .... r of Ind' , m,p 'l't'lch the plrmluloft of "he $ur.eror G. n.ral of 'I'Id l.. . t ....1 1Ie nautical mLJ., 1I'I ...ur .d from thl ' PP 'op" ltl bUI li l'll . 2. ... 72 MIL ES ; ; ; »n 1(~ CO) ffiIE i i iii 20 0 20 40 60 80 100 KILOMETRES MAP SHOWING THE INCIDENCE OF BANDONED VILLAGES AND THE TALUKS STATE ISOUNOARY DISTRICT '" WHERE MALARIA WAS ENDEMIC TALUK " PRIOR TO THE- N. M . E. PROGRAMME

PERCENTAGE OF ABANDONE D VILLAGES

~ 15 · 00 AND· ABOVE

._ 10· 00-14 - 99

-!!!III II 5 · 00- 9 · 99

11 1111111111 2 · 00 - 4 - 99.

I I 1 ·00-:- 1 - 99

b-- --j BELOW 1,- 00

1-- . __ .

TAMIL NADU

~ ..,otI ~ of 1"01. mlp ",,'eA .h. ,.,.mU. /on of The uNltOrt:aJ ...... 01 Inc". ~ ... Into ~ .... co. dlSUllc. d at'!, Surv.J'Of' G.Aeral o( Indl • . ~ ~"'I ...... "red from t"-approprlat. bue 11_ · I / I

•

l4; ...; n; ""'I.es :OOY~CIDmJE . F'9 r==I 20 0 ;;to 40 60 60 .00 '''LO''''ETR~S MAP SHOWING THE INCIDENCE OF A8ANDONED VILLAGES AND THE ST.. TE IIOUNO.. R'I' DISTRICT 9. TALUKS WORST AFFECTED BY -THE T .. I.UK to INF,-UENZA EPIDEMIC OF 1918 -1919 '.

'1\ \ '\ I PERCENTAGE OF ABANDONED VILLAGES

~ 15 ' 00 AND A80VE

III 10' 00- 14 ' 99'

_ 5 ' 00- 9 ' 99

illllIlIIIIl 2 . 00 - 4 · 99

§ "00-1 , 99

o BELOW 1 ' 00 o NIL INFLUENZA AFFECTED __... TALUKS

ANDRRA PRADESH

.... .,.. Swrwy of IMi. map -"h ~N pwm&A_ qI .. Set'"1W c...,.., (If ~ ... )001r~@m~ 2~ °PiA 'h .~ 'i "'~E~. .zo 0 20 AO 60 BO 100 KILOMETRES MAP SHOWING THE INCIDENCE OF ABANDONED VILLAGES AND THE TALUKS SToftTE eQUNOARY OISlAICT n IDENTIFIED AS DROUGHT AFFECTED BY TAL.UIt t.

THE IRRIGATION COMMISSION 1972 )'1 I / PERCENTAGE OF A.BANDONED VILl-AGES

~ 15·00 AND ABOVE

_ 10·00-14·99

_ 5·00- 999

!IIl1IlIIill 2 ·00 - 4· 99

§ 100- I 99

b----j BEl-OW ,·00 DN'L ,..... DROUGHT AFFECTED L_] TALUKS

ANDRRA PRADESH

e...d"Wpofl ~II''''')' of traala Map with .tIt ,.rmWtlOn of Thl .."I«trlll w~"" ~ I,••• ",tlle! In10 thl M. to I dllunu of lhe SIWNJIC.G ....raloflllcli. .... nwtkll ",rln ...... ,.d 'rom ,he .,prOpt1nl bIN lint c 3: ~ UJ L. (!) 0 «£ ..J L. ..J 0 Vl :> I ~N '3 .S a a:: ::o_ «-0 Il. I ~ a:: ~ «~ I o Q) «L.

.. '"o "5

o _, I i I:. R ... \1 R i. MAHAJENAHALLI Area Merged in Harihar Town

FURLONGS 1 2

1J c

I l> \ '" I I. '"

Village Boundary _._._._._ Rood5 •••••. ===== Cart Tracks .. ::..-:_-::~------:. River/Stream ., ~ Tonl< •••.••.• ~ • Residential A,eo of tho 0,igino1 Village c 3; ~ L :;J C o "0 £ L :;J o l'J c "0., 0> L., ~ .,o «L

c $: o ~ i-= - L.. ...J ::J ...J C « 0 :r::~ « .-9 (J)L ::J VlN O o (.'J :r::C) ...l25 a:

I «.~ cr "0 ~ « Q.) >0> W L Q~ o Q.) «L

\ MALUR VILLAGE Area Merged in Ma/ur Town

FURLONGS o 1 2

I i o I. ".-/ H .;' 1- ,./...... i ~

I ~ I '" I :z: . '" .I .. I .. i Q Q I '" .L...... <0 I ::: i :; j ::: I ;: I .. I ;:'" i

:0:'-'>( I l' < . ~

~ RfSidenf

FURLONGS o I 2 3 4 s

Villog.e 50undary _1._.'-Il_'_Ok Rood ••••• TOWII Cort Tracks • •• ==-:.~;.::.::.. -- ...::: ... :,:~: Tank~ ••••

• Residerotial Area of the Original Village ~

.., « :gN .... Z I- 0 ...J a: "

(!)

'f ....

-.J

::.

...J >, ...J '1 '{ :':: , l- '" • I ~ o ( > o .5 .. c( '- "0 « a ~ ..'- o « ~ C .;;;"0" a:OJ ,.

I 1 I 8I ~ : : : "0 • • c' . ~ ~. o . '" o d) • g : ~ f/I F . ~ -g t ~ ;; ~ <.) ~

" 2'" '> '0 .. c c :~ ~ c (!) ~ 0 .D .fJ :£" Vl 0 .._ t? 0 .. 0 "0 " " ~ ..~ ::;; ·2c 0 ."2" .. IJ ~

MER \J SIRA VlllA.GE Town Area Merged in Slra

w

z

()

Road • ...... _Aroa Merged in Sira Town. Ca~t' Iroc).cs • River/Stream ..=-=-=== ;onk •.. .~ ~ R'~dcnli"l Area Of -th"!: Origi net ViI <:lge: ~