The Calcutta Weekly Notes Monday February 2 1942

The device of the Dewani whatever its origin or explanation had iportant legal consequences in that it made the Courts of the country the Courts of the Mogul Emperor or of the Prtectorate and therefore made the local arid personal laws the proper laws to be applied rather than the law of England. [...] 36 (2) (h) only saves rights aquired in consequence of the execution of the re-opened decree." A purchaser from the decree-holder auction-purchaser does not acquire his rights " in consequence of " the execution : the consequence of the excution ends with the auction-purchase by the decree-holder. [...] 36 (2) (c) which gives to the Court the right to order restitution is itself limited to such property " as may be in the possession of the decree-holder on the date on which the decree was re-opened." Where the property has passed to the possession of someone else the sub-section would not apply. [...] In other words the necessities of the case demanded that Clive should recognize formally the authority of the Delhi Emperor and to have the attributes of sovereignty divided beween the great Moghul and the Company. [...] 53 of the Act but in such a case the only pupose of the transfer must be to secure the debt due to the transferee and the property transferred should not be substantially more than the amount of debt which is sought to be satisfied by the transfer.