1786-03-24 (static/transcriptions/1786/03/203.jpg)

56
1786. Sessions. [Friday] March 24.

The next topick of evidence viz the manner of passing foujdarry Kubbuzes and of [having?] payment for them, I opposed the entering upon in Reply. But the [Court?] thought fit it should be given. The only question that is material is whether the Dewan’s signature be not [necessary?] before the Cash can be obtained. If it be, to affix that signature without due Examination must be gross negligence if not criminal connivance.
The proceedings at Chitpur