HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0594 and id is 1 raw text is: JESWUNT SING-JEE V. JET SING-JEE [1841J II MOORE IND. APP., 424
[4241 JESWUNT SINC4JEE UBBY SING-JEE, and CHUTUR SING-JEE DEEP
SINCG-JEE,-Appellants; JET SING-JEE UBBY SINC-JEE,--Respondent*
[Jan. 7, 1841].
On appeal from the Sudder Dewwnny Court of Bombay.
In a suit for possession of zemindary and other estates claimed as Son and heir
of the deceased Zemindar, the Defendants denied the title of the Plaintiff,
alleging that he was a spurious and supposititious child, and tendered fifty-
eight witnesses to prove that fact: the Zillah Court having taken the deposi-
tions of thirty of these witnesses, refused to permit the remaining twenty-
eight to be examined, on the ground, that being to prove the facts deposed to
by those already examined, it was unnecessary to take their depositions, and,
ultimately, decided in favour of the Plaintiff; the Defendants appealed to
the Sudder Court, which Court refused to examine the witnesses rejected by
the Zillah, and affirmed the decree of that Court. On appeal to Her Majesty
in Council, the Judicial Committee remitted the case back to the Sudder
Court, being of opinion, that the refusal by that Court to admit the examina-
tion of the witnesses tendered, was irregular, and that no decision could be
come to upon the merits under such circumstances.
On the 20th of June, 1825, the Respondent, Jet Sing-jee, by his Mother and
guardian, Baee Purtaba, filed a plaint in the Zillah Court of Broach against the
Appellants, Jeswunt Sing-jee Ubby Sing-jee, and Chutur Sing-jee Deep Sing-jee,
the Brother and Nephew, and also against Mussumat Gula Bhaee, the Widow of
Rana Ubby Sing-jee, deceased, for recovery of zemindary and other real and per-
sonal estates in the possession of Jeswunt Sing-jee Ubby Sing-jee, belonging to the
[425] late Rana Ubby Sing-jee, and which the Respondent claimed to be entitled to
as his Son and heir.
The Appellants, on the 5th of December, 1825, filed separate answers to the plaint,
insisting, among other things, that the Plaintiff, Jet Sing-jee, was not the Son of
the deceased Rana Ubby Sing-jee, but a spurious and supposititious child, the
offspring of a Slave, and setting up a deed of adoption, alleged to have been made
by the late Rana in favour of the Defendant, Jeswunt Sing-jee Ubby Sing-jee.
Gula Bhaee, the other Defendant, also filed an answer to the plaint, disclaiming
any interest in the subject of the suit, other than the maintenance due to her as
Widow of the deceased Rana Ubby Sing-jee.
After the usual pleadings, documentary and oral evidence was produced on
both sides. For the Plaintiff, Witnesses were examined to prove his legitimacy, and
the circumstances attending his birth and recognition by his deceased Father.. The
Defendants summoned fifty-eight Witnesses in support of their case. The deposi-
tions of sixteen of these Witnesses having been taken, there being considerable delay
on the part of the Defendants in producing the remaining forty-two, the Court
directed the Defendants' Vakeels to be asked what points these Witnesses were to
be called to prove, and upon receiving their answer, decided summarily that it was
unnecessary to examine more than fourteen of these forty-two remaining Witnesses,
twenty-eight being to prove what had been already gone through by the sixteen first
Witnesses.
On the 22nd of August, 1826, the Zillah Judge pronounced a decree, part of
which was in the following terms: After a most attentive perusal of the whole of
the documents filed, and evidence taken in [426] this case, the Court is quite satisfied
that the Plaintiff has proved his claim to the Guddy of Amod; for, independent of the
evidence and documents produced by the Plaintiff, the strong resemblance that
Jet Sing bears to his deceased Father, the latter of whom was personally known to
the Judge when alive, is so great as to leave no doubt in the mind of the Court as
* Present: Members of the Judicial Committee,-Lord Brougham, the Vice-
Chancellor, Mr. Justice Erskine, and the Right Hon. Dr. Lushington.
Privy Councillor,-Assessor,-Sir Edward Hyde East, Bart.
P.C. vii. 361 12a](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0594&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)