Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
112, 16 (‘ Brzhaspati’). 2. M. Macn. I, 5, 3 (uncertain); V. T., &c. 3. Smriti#. matir notsahate yasya vivade vaktum ikshatah | ditavya eva kala# sydd arthipratyarthinor api 240 QUOTATIONS FROM NARADA. III, 4. granted to him (by the judge), whether he be plaintiff or defendant. 4. When the defendant contradicts the charge, such an answer is termed a denial in a cause. 5. When, the plaint having been reduced to writing by the plaintiff, the defendant admits it but adduces some special circumstance, it is called a (retort in the form) pratyavaskandana (special plea). 6. That (answer) is no (true) answer which is dubious, not to the point, too narrow, too extensive, or meeting one part only of the plaint. 7. An answer which treats of a different subject, or which is incomplete, or couched in obscure language, or confused, not intelligible without an explanation, or unreasonable, will never enable (the defendant) to gain his cause. 4. Raghunandana, p.17; M. Macn. I, 5, 7, &c. (‘ Katyayana’). 5. M. Macn. I, 5, 9. 6,7. V.T.; M.Macn.I, 5,11. ‘Dubious,’ as when (the plaintiff) having declared: This man has received a hundred Suvarzas from me, (the defendant replies): Yes, I have received a hundred Suvargzas or a hundred Mashas. ‘Not to the point,’ as when a debtor being sued for a hundred Suvaraas, replies that he has received a hundred Pazas. ‘Too narrow,’ as when (a debtor) being sued for a hundred Suvaraas, replies that he has received five. ‘Too extensive,’ as when (a debtor) being sued for a hundred Suvarnas, replies that he has received two hundred. ‘ Meeting one part only of the plaint,’ as when (a debtor) being sued for gold, clothes, and other objects, replies that he has received gold but nothing else. ‘Which treats of a different subject, as when an action for debt is answered by referring to a different title of law, e.g. when a man being sued for a debt of a hundred Suvarmas, replies, He (the plaintiff) has struck me. ‘Incomplete,’ not containing any reference to the particulars of country, place, and so on, as when the plaint states a certain field situated in the central country (Madhyadesa) near Benares, towards the east of it, to have been seized by the defendant, and the defendant replies merely, ‘I III, 11. THE ANSWER, 241 8. In the case of a denial, the burden of proof rests’ with the plaintiff ; in the case of a special plea, (it rests) with the defendant. 9. Let (the plaintiff) make an answer which corresponds to (the contents of) the plaint. If he does not (make an answer), the king shall cause him to make one, by employing (any of) the (four) methods of conciliation, division, and the rest, till the matter has been cleared up. 10. When, in the case of a denial (on the part of the defendant) the plaintiff himself admits such (denial) as correct, it has to be considered as a confession, and one half of the (ordinary) fine shall be inflicted on the plaintiff.
210. When, in the case of a denial (on the part of the defendant) the plaintiff himself admits such (denial) as correct, it has to be considered as a confession, and one half of the (ordinary) fine shall be inflicted on the plaintiff. 11. In the case of a denial, the burden of proof rests with the plaintiff; in the case of a special plea, have taken it” ‘Couched in obscure terms,’ as when in a suit for a hundred Suvarnzas the defendant exclaims, ‘Am I the only person indebted to this man?’ implying by his speech that the chief judge, or assessors, or plaintiff, is indebted to another man. ‘Confused,’ inconsistent, as when in an action for a hundred Suvarmas the defendant declares, ‘Yes; I have received that sum, but I do not owe it.” ‘Not intelligible without an explanation,’ owing to the use of wrong inflections, compounds, or constructions, or to the employment of a foreign language. ‘Unreasonable,’ contrary to common sense, as when the plaint runs as follows: The defendant has received a hundred Suvarnas from me, repayable with interest, and has paid the interest only, and not the principal; and the defendant replies: ‘Yes; I have paid’ the interest, but have not received the principal.’ M. 8. M. Macn. I, 5, 14 (uncertain); May. p. 11. g. Smritié. yathartham uttaram dady4n na fet tad dapayen nrzpak 1 sAmabhed4dibhir mfrgair yavat soxrthak samuddhritah ut Bribery and force are the two remaining methods. ro. SmritiZ. nihnave tu yad4 vadt svayam tat pratipadyate | gfey sampratipattis tu tasyardho vinayak smritah u 11. M, Macn. II, 6, 5. (33) R 242 QUOTATIONS FROM NARADA. IH, 12. it rests with the defendant ; but in a plea of former judgment, all that is required in the shape of proof is to produce the previous decree. 12. The defendant is at liberty to delay his answer for three days, or for five days even. IV. WRITINGS AND POSSESSION. 1. A writing (or document) should be signed by witnesses, the (natural) order of ideas and syllables should not be interrupted, local customs and general rules should be observed in it, and it should be complete in every respect. 2. A document signed by the king with his own hand, or sealed with his own seal, is declared to be a royal document, and is (considered as equal to) an attested document in all affairs. 3. A document suspected (to have a blemish) is valid, unless the debtor should have clearly indicated its blemish; and so (is the validity of) a document which is more than twenty years old (established by mere lapse of time). 4. In the beginning, gift is a cause (of ownership); 12. Vy. X. pratyarthf labhate kalam tryaham pa#kdham eva va | IV, 1. Smritiz. lekhyam tu sakshimat kéryam aviluptakram4ksharam 1 des4A4rasthitiyutam samagram sarvavastushu Ul 2. Smritik.; Viram. p. 195 (‘ Vasishsha’).
34. In the beginning, gift is a cause (of ownership); 12. Vy. X. pratyarthf labhate kalam tryaham pa#kdham eva va | IV, 1. Smritiz. lekhyam tu sakshimat kéryam aviluptakram4ksharam 1 des4A4rasthitiyutam samagram sarvavastushu Ul 2. Smritik.; Viram. p. 195 (‘ Vasishsha’). 3. Smritid.; Viram. p. 200 (‘K4tydyana’). The validity of a document having been called into doubt, because it either has a blemish or has been vitiated by the lapse of a considerable time, it becomes valid through proof by ordeal. This is the meaning, mere lapse of time being insufficient to produce validity. Smriti#. This interpretation can hardly be correct, as ordeals are not referred to in this text. 4. M. Macn. III, 6, 5. In the case of the first man (possessor) IV, 7. WRITINGS AND POSSESSION. 243 in the middle, possession with a title; but continued and hereditary possession by itself is also a good cause (of ownership). 5. There are six modes of acquiring wealth: by obtaining (property), what is declared to have been given or earned, (acquisition through) valour, (in the shape of) a marriage portion, and through inheritance from relations or others. 6. Having listened to the answer, (the plaintiff) at the trial shall produce a document as evidence, or he shall prove possession continued for a long time, and corroborated by (the statements of) the neighbours, or by (other) evidence. 7. Supposing a religious student were to perform some vow extending over a period of thirty-six years, or a man (engaged in trade or traffic) were to reside abroad for a long time in the pursuit of wealth : possession proved by witnesses is superior to, or more decisive than, possession, excepting hereditary possession. Such hereditary possession, again, is superior in the case of the fourth in descent to a title proved by documents. In the case of an intermediate claimant (as e.g. the second or third in descent) a title coupled with possession of short duration even is more decisive than a title entirely destitute of possession. M. 5. Smritiz. labdham danakriyAproktam sauryam vaivahikam tathé 1 bandhavadipragdgAtam shadvidhas tu dhanfgamas w ‘ Obtaining,’ by birth, paternal or other (inherited) wealth ; or, obtaining property by finding it, as in the case of treasure-trove. Sm~rutif. 6. Smritik. srutvottaram kriyapade lekhyam sadhanam uddiset t simantalakshamopet4 bhuktir va firakalikt. ‘The term sddhanam a fortiori denotes witnesses in this place. Therefore the meaning is as follows. In a dispute regarding a house, field, or other (immovable property), the claimant must adduce a document or witnesses, or he must plead possession.’ Smritid. 4-10. Smritik. brahmafart faret kims’id vratam shafstrimsadabdikam | artharthi Aanyavishaye dirghakalam vasen narak \ sam4- R 2 244 QUOTATIONS FROM NARADA. IV, 8.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
112, 16 (‘ Brzhaspati’). 2. M. Macn. I, 5, 3 (uncertain); V. T., &c. 3. Smriti#. matir notsahate yasya vivade vaktum ikshatah | ditavya eva kala# sydd arthipratyarthinor api 240 QUOTATIONS FROM NARADA. III, 4. granted to him (by the judge), whether he be plaintiff or defendant. 4. When the defendant contradicts the charge, such an answer is termed a denial in a cause. 5. When, the plaint having been reduced to writing by the plaintiff, the defendant admits it but adduces some special circumstance, it is called a (retort in the form) pratyavaskandana (special plea). 6. That (answer) is no (true) answer which is dubious, not to the point, too narrow, too extensive, or meeting one part only of the plaint. 7. An answer which treats of a different subject, or which is incomplete, or couched in obscure language, or confused, not intelligible without an explanation, or unreasonable, will never enable (the defendant) to gain his cause. 4. Raghunandana, p.17; M. Macn. I, 5, 7, &c. (‘ Katyayana’). 5. M. Macn. I, 5, 9. 6,7. V.T.; M.Macn.I, 5,11. ‘Dubious,’ as when (the plaintiff) having declared: This man has received a hundred Suvarzas from me, (the defendant replies): Yes, I have received a hundred Suvargzas or a hundred Mashas. ‘Not to the point,’ as when a debtor being sued for a hundred Suvaraas, replies that he has received a hundred Pazas. ‘Too narrow,’ as when (a debtor) being sued for a hundred Suvaraas, replies that he has received five. ‘Too extensive,’ as when (a debtor) being sued for a hundred Suvarnas, replies that he has received two hundred. ‘ Meeting one part only of the plaint,’ as when (a debtor) being sued for gold, clothes, and other objects, replies that he has received gold but nothing else. ‘Which treats of a different subject, as when an action for debt is answered by referring to a different title of law, e.g. when a man being sued for a debt of a hundred Suvarmas, replies, He (the plaintiff) has struck me. ‘Incomplete,’ not containing any reference to the particulars of country, place, and so on, as when the plaint states a certain field situated in the central country (Madhyadesa) near Benares, towards the east of it, to have been seized by the defendant, and the defendant replies merely, ‘I III, 11. THE ANSWER, 241 8. In the case of a denial, the burden of proof rests’ with the plaintiff ; in the case of a special plea, (it rests) with the defendant. 9. Let (the plaintiff) make an answer which corresponds to (the contents of) the plaint. If he does not (make an answer), the king shall cause him to make one, by employing (any of) the (four) methods of conciliation, division, and the rest, till the matter has been cleared up. 10. When, in the case of a denial (on the part of the defendant) the plaintiff himself admits such (denial) as correct, it has to be considered as a confession, and one half of the (ordinary) fine shall be inflicted on the plaintiff.
210. When, in the case of a denial (on the part of the defendant) the plaintiff himself admits such (denial) as correct, it has to be considered as a confession, and one half of the (ordinary) fine shall be inflicted on the plaintiff. 11. In the case of a denial, the burden of proof rests with the plaintiff; in the case of a special plea, have taken it” ‘Couched in obscure terms,’ as when in a suit for a hundred Suvarnzas the defendant exclaims, ‘Am I the only person indebted to this man?’ implying by his speech that the chief judge, or assessors, or plaintiff, is indebted to another man. ‘Confused,’ inconsistent, as when in an action for a hundred Suvarmas the defendant declares, ‘Yes; I have received that sum, but I do not owe it.” ‘Not intelligible without an explanation,’ owing to the use of wrong inflections, compounds, or constructions, or to the employment of a foreign language. ‘Unreasonable,’ contrary to common sense, as when the plaint runs as follows: The defendant has received a hundred Suvarnas from me, repayable with interest, and has paid the interest only, and not the principal; and the defendant replies: ‘Yes; I have paid’ the interest, but have not received the principal.’ M. 8. M. Macn. I, 5, 14 (uncertain); May. p. 11. g. Smritié. yathartham uttaram dady4n na fet tad dapayen nrzpak 1 sAmabhed4dibhir mfrgair yavat soxrthak samuddhritah ut Bribery and force are the two remaining methods. ro. SmritiZ. nihnave tu yad4 vadt svayam tat pratipadyate | gfey sampratipattis tu tasyardho vinayak smritah u 11. M, Macn. II, 6, 5. (33) R 242 QUOTATIONS FROM NARADA. IH, 12. it rests with the defendant ; but in a plea of former judgment, all that is required in the shape of proof is to produce the previous decree. 12. The defendant is at liberty to delay his answer for three days, or for five days even. IV. WRITINGS AND POSSESSION. 1. A writing (or document) should be signed by witnesses, the (natural) order of ideas and syllables should not be interrupted, local customs and general rules should be observed in it, and it should be complete in every respect. 2. A document signed by the king with his own hand, or sealed with his own seal, is declared to be a royal document, and is (considered as equal to) an attested document in all affairs. 3. A document suspected (to have a blemish) is valid, unless the debtor should have clearly indicated its blemish; and so (is the validity of) a document which is more than twenty years old (established by mere lapse of time). 4. In the beginning, gift is a cause (of ownership); 12. Vy. X. pratyarthf labhate kalam tryaham pa#kdham eva va | IV, 1. Smritiz. lekhyam tu sakshimat kéryam aviluptakram4ksharam 1 des4A4rasthitiyutam samagram sarvavastushu Ul 2. Smritik.; Viram. p. 195 (‘ Vasishsha’).
34. In the beginning, gift is a cause (of ownership); 12. Vy. X. pratyarthf labhate kalam tryaham pa#kdham eva va | IV, 1. Smritiz. lekhyam tu sakshimat kéryam aviluptakram4ksharam 1 des4A4rasthitiyutam samagram sarvavastushu Ul 2. Smritik.; Viram. p. 195 (‘ Vasishsha’). 3. Smritid.; Viram. p. 200 (‘K4tydyana’). The validity of a document having been called into doubt, because it either has a blemish or has been vitiated by the lapse of a considerable time, it becomes valid through proof by ordeal. This is the meaning, mere lapse of time being insufficient to produce validity. Smriti#. This interpretation can hardly be correct, as ordeals are not referred to in this text. 4. M. Macn. III, 6, 5. In the case of the first man (possessor) IV, 7. WRITINGS AND POSSESSION. 243 in the middle, possession with a title; but continued and hereditary possession by itself is also a good cause (of ownership). 5. There are six modes of acquiring wealth: by obtaining (property), what is declared to have been given or earned, (acquisition through) valour, (in the shape of) a marriage portion, and through inheritance from relations or others. 6. Having listened to the answer, (the plaintiff) at the trial shall produce a document as evidence, or he shall prove possession continued for a long time, and corroborated by (the statements of) the neighbours, or by (other) evidence. 7. Supposing a religious student were to perform some vow extending over a period of thirty-six years, or a man (engaged in trade or traffic) were to reside abroad for a long time in the pursuit of wealth : possession proved by witnesses is superior to, or more decisive than, possession, excepting hereditary possession. Such hereditary possession, again, is superior in the case of the fourth in descent to a title proved by documents. In the case of an intermediate claimant (as e.g. the second or third in descent) a title coupled with possession of short duration even is more decisive than a title entirely destitute of possession. M. 5. Smritiz. labdham danakriyAproktam sauryam vaivahikam tathé 1 bandhavadipragdgAtam shadvidhas tu dhanfgamas w ‘ Obtaining,’ by birth, paternal or other (inherited) wealth ; or, obtaining property by finding it, as in the case of treasure-trove. Sm~rutif. 6. Smritik. srutvottaram kriyapade lekhyam sadhanam uddiset t simantalakshamopet4 bhuktir va firakalikt. ‘The term sddhanam a fortiori denotes witnesses in this place. Therefore the meaning is as follows. In a dispute regarding a house, field, or other (immovable property), the claimant must adduce a document or witnesses, or he must plead possession.’ Smritid. 4-10. Smritik. brahmafart faret kims’id vratam shafstrimsadabdikam | artharthi Aanyavishaye dirghakalam vasen narak \ sam4- R 2 244 QUOTATIONS FROM NARADA. IV, 8.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.