1791-11-24 (static/transcriptions/1791/11/255.jpg)

(299

For Deft No. 2. Defendant’s Answer.
answer further to the same, except that this Defendt admits that in consequence of the false assertions and wilfull misrepresentations of and concealments of the truth by the said Cauzee and Muftees, and the said Complainant Behader Beg the said Provincial Council did pass some order (but what order this Defendt cannot setforth) whereby the said Cojah Zekeriah and four other persons, namely Ghyrut Beg, Innoyetullah Beg Khauzee Moazem Beg and Hadjee Mahomed Ivauz, (who were all of them severally subscribing Witnesses to the said Hebanamah & Ekrauraum by which this Defendt so claimed as aforesaid) were respectively apprehended, and kept in custody, untill the pretended division of the Property of the said Shabaz Beg Khan deceased as directed as aforesaid had been alledged to have taken place, and in consequence of which order after such pretended division had been so alledged to have taken place the said Cojah Zekeriah and the several persons so apprehended were delivered over to the Fouzdary Adaulut or Court of Criminal Jurisdiction at Patna aforesaid, before which and where they respectively took their several trials for such pretended forgeries and were afterwards, as this Defendant is informed & believes, respectively acquitted, from which and from
the