1791-11-24 (static/transcriptions/1791/11/277.jpg)

(321.

For Deft – No 2. Defendant’s Answer.
and Ekrauraum or either of them were or was forged or fraudulent; and this Deponent positively denies as aforesaid the said Deeds or Instruments called Hebanama and Ekrauraum and each of them to be forged and fraudulent in any manner whatever, and that the same or either of them ever were or ws written by order or directions or at the request of any other Persons or Person whatever other than by the orders or directions, or at the request, of the said Shabaz Beg Khan in his life time; who some short time previous to his death delivered to this Defendant the said Deeds called Hebanama and Ekrauraum, and told her then that he had thereby made over to this Defendant the whole of his property and for which only purpose such Deeds of Hebanama and Ekrauraum were so written made and delivered us last aforesaid. And this Defendant does not believe that any Circumstances or Circumstance ever could or did arise upon the face of the two last mentioned Deeds or Instruments, or of either of them or from this Defendant not having produced the said Mohurnama, was reasonably to induce any Suspicion that the said Deeds called Hebanama and Ekrauraum were so written made and delivered us last aforesaid. And this Defendant does not believe that any Circumstances or Circumstance ever could or did arise upon the face of the two last mentioned Deeds or Instruments, or of either of them, or from this Defendant not having produced the said Mohurnama, so as reasonably to induce any Suspicion that the said Deeds called Hebanama and Ekraurraum or either of them were or was forged or fraudulent, and which suspicion (if ever actually entertained by any persons or person whatever) this Defendant denies to be just and true, and this Defendant admits that on or about the twenty ninth day of June one thousand Seven hundred and Seventy nine a [Motion?]