Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A party, who was both heir-male and heir of provision to his father, being served tanquam legitimus et proximior hæres masculus et provisionis virtute contractus matrimonialis, and having challenged a disposition granted by his father, after inhibition served on the said contract of marriage, which the other party alleged he was bound to warrant as heir-male, and representing the defunct; the Lords found, that his retour did not singly make him heir of provision, (upon which title he might have challenged such deeds,) but likewise general heir-male.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 345. Fountainhall.
*** This case is No 55. p. 12905, voce Provision to Heirs and Children.
