Loch, J.@mdashThis is an application that certain papers filed with an application for review, should be transmitted with the record to the Privy Council; and in support of the application, Mr. Allan has produced an order of the Privy Council of the 9th December 1868, in the case of Khujoorunnissa, petitioner and appellant to the Privy Council, by which order the Privy Council directed that the papers presented with the petition of review, should be transmitted with the record to England. But, in that case, their Lordships do not lay down a general rule that, where an application for review has been made and rejected, such application, with any papers accompanying the petition of review, is to be sent with the record to the Privy Council. There is a ruling of the Full Bench of this Court, Raja Syud Enaet Hoossein v. Rani Roushun Jehan [1 B.L.R. (F.B.), 1], which rules that, where an application for review has been rejected, the papers relating to the review are not to be sent to England, as they do not form a part of the record; and on referring to Macpherson''s Privy Council Practice, page 123, I find that "the Sudder Adawlut having decided a cause, an application for review of judgment was made to it, and fresh evidence was tendered. The Sudder Adawlut refused to grant a review. The original decree was appealed from, but not the order refusing a review. The Judicial Committee declined to consider the additional evidence, although it was included in the transcript."
2. The case alluded to in Macpherson is that of
