1777-11-24 (static/transcriptions/1777/11/018.jpg)

1777. Sittings. [Monday] Nov. 24.

he and Mr. Holme had decreed I should give to him other Ground of the same Value. I offer’d him other Ground, and he refused to take it. Two years afterward Byraggee took possession of the Ground now in Question by Force.
The decree mention’d was offer’d in Evidence but we were of opinion it could not be received not being against the Defendant, but against Sunker Noogee who was then not in possession of the Land. So that he had no Interest to defend. There seem’d reason to suspect this suit in the Zillah of Cutcherry on which this decree was, to have been a trick between Byraggee the original owner of the Land, and his relation Sunker Noogee, to dispossess the purchaser under Sunker Noogee.
We were of opinion the Witnesses for the Plaintiff had proved the Plaintiff had no tittle. They had proved the Plaintiff had mortgaged the Land, that after that mortgage had been forfeited, even if they have the notion of the Equity of [Rememption?], and if we could in this Court of Law take notice of that title, he had given it up, by refusing to pay the money and take the Land when it was offer’d to him, and by being present and not objecting when the Land was sold.
/ Therefore