The pargana was transferred, as the money payment could not be agreed upon; and in September Mr. Martin, who had succeeded Sir E. Colebrooke, proposed to Government that the pargana of Loharu should be restored to Shams-ud-din in lieu of a fixed sum of twenty-six thousand rupees a year to be paid by him annually to his two younger brothers.  This proposal was made on the ground that Amin-ud-din could not collect the revenues from the refractory landholders (instigated, no doubt, by the emissaries of Shams-ud-din), and consequently could not pay his younger brother’s revenue into the treasury.  In calculating the annual net revenue of 10,420 rupees, 15,000 of the gross revenue had been estimated as the annual expenses of the mutual [sic] establishments of the two brothers.  To the arrangement proposed by Mr. Martin the younger brothers strongly objected; and proposed in preference to make over the pargana to the British Government, on condition of receiving the net revenue, whatever might be the amount.  Mr. Martin was desired by the Governor-General to effect this arrangement, should Amin-ud-din appear still to wish it; but he preferred retaining the management of it in his own hands, in the hope that circumstances would improve.

Shams-ud-din, however, pressed his claim to the restoration of the pargana so often that it was at last, in September, 1833, insisted upon by Government, on the ground that Amin-ud-din had failed to fulfil that article of the agreement which bound him to pay annually into the Delhi treasury 5,210 rupees for his younger brother, though that brother had never complained; on the contrary, lived with him on the best possible terms, and was as averse as himself to the retransfer of the pargana, on condition that they gave up their claims to a large share of the movable property of their late father, which had been already decided in their favour in the court of first instance.  Mr. W. Fraser, who had succeeded to the office of Governor-General’s representative in the Delhi Territories, remonstrated strongly against this measure; and wished to bring it again under the consideration of Government; on the grounds that Zia-ud-din had never made any complaint against his brother Amin-ud-din for want of punctuality in the payment of his share of the net revenue after the payment of their mutual establishments; that the two brothers would be deprived by this measure of an hereditary estate to the value of sixty thousand rupees a year in perpetuity, burthened with the condition that they relinquished a suit already gained in the court of first instance, and likely to be gained in appeal, involving a sum that would of itself yield them that annual sum at the moderate interest of 6 per cent.  The grounds alleged by him were not considered valid, and the pargana was made over to Shams-ud-din.  The pargana now yields 40,000 rupees a year, and under good management may yield 70,000.