BOOK ffiVIEW 71 offered one-third of the produce as rent; abolition of abwabs, reduction of interest on paddy loans, and protection against eviction was demanded. Social pressure, by way of denial of community services to landlords was used. Peasant actions continued, both spontaneous and organised, and spread to other areas as news reached through local markets. The Bargadar Bill acceded to the sharecroppers' demand. It gave impetus to the movement in new areas. In old areas sharecroppers believed that their demands had been met and dropped the agitation. There was inertia in the BPKS who believed that the legislation would pass. The Bill was never debated and was ultimately dropped in the face of internal opposition by Muslim League and Congress. In the later phase, landlords' grainstores were forcibly broken open, paddy seized forcibly, and divided according to tebhaga. The use of force invited police repression. Eventually, the movement subsided in the face of extensive repression (pp. 172-196). In the post-independence period, the movement was plagued with numerous difficulties. The organisation had been shattered by partition, and the 1948-50 struggles were more localized and limited. Tebhaga became the subsidiary, and zamindary abolition the primary demand. Repression paralysed the organisation and demoralised the local leaders. Communalism acted as an inhibiting factor and was a major cause of failure. During 1948-^0, tebhaga was not replicated and sharecroppers were not inspired to act on such a massive scale. Kisan activists were more involved in preventing communal conflicts rather than initiating sharecroppers' struggles Brahma Nand Department of History, A.R.S.D. College, Dhaula Kuan, / Delhi University, New Delhi.