1791-11-24 (static/transcriptions/1791/11/288.jpg)

330.

Beg and his said wife to any such or the like purport or Effect as in the said Bill of Complaint is for such purpose falsely alledged and setforth. And this Defendt further answering admits that there was as aforesaid a dispute before the Council & Cauzee of Patna concerning the validity of the said two Deeds or Instruments but if the said Ghyrut Beg had then and thereupon been called on for his testimony he could not without perjuring himself (as this Defendt verily believes) have given any Evidence relative to the said two Deeds or Instruments called Hebanamah & Ekrauraum different in substance or Effect from the Evidence he afterwards gave as aforesaid at the said trial of the said action at Law. And this Defendt further admits that the said Ghyrut Beg was seized and confined at Patna as aforesaid but why or by what means or order or how confined this Defendt cannot setforth otherwise than as herein before setforth and mentioned nor does this Defendt know nor can she setforth whether at such the time of his confinement as last aforesaid or at any other time the said Zekeriah ever informed the said Ghyrut Beg that if he the said Ghyrut Beg should then confess the truth he would be put to death as in the said Bill of Complaint is alledged but this Defendt says it maybe true that the said Zekeriah did advise the said Ghyrut Beg to say that he had affixed his seal to the said two Deeds
or