1786-03-14 (static/transcriptions/1786/03/105.jpg)

(30

being ignorant of Engl: Law, supposed that either of them might bring an action agt him for those profits.
[To much?] for the Equity of the case.
But it is said that Dutt had been in possion 12 yrs and might have objected that 12 yrs and might have objd that passion to any Ejectment [ILL] by R. Sittany. But first this is not English Law, & is not shewn to be Hindoo Law and 2dly he had not