592 DUVALL v. WATERS.

Pleasant Grove." This is a designation of one entire tract of land
of such a name; it is not as seems to have been supposed, a sale
of an uncertain part of a tract of land called "Pleasant Grove;"
and therefore the description of this parcel also is sufficiently cer-
tain. Thirdly, of " one tract of land called Duvall's Pleasure or
part of Duvall's Pleasure." This is a designation of one whole
tract having the one or the other of two names, and is, therefore, a
sufficient description. Fourthly, of "one tract of land called
Teukesbury and a part of Teukesbury and Walker's Delight" This
description also clearly refers to and designates one parcel of land
as a whole and not as a part of a tract. And lastly, of " a tract of
land called Friendship" This description is confessedly sufficient.

Hence it clearly follows, that as this return is sufficiently descrip-
tive in its several parts, it must be so considered as a whole, and
when taken altogether. Conseqnently this plaintiff, who has been
thus returned as the purchaser, has thereby obtained such a valid
right to the lands held by the defendant Nathan Waters, as entitles
him to have the fraudulent deeds complained of set aside so far as
they at all interfere with his claim.

Whereupon it is decreed, that the said deed bearing date on the
17th day of February, 1824, and also the deed bearing date on the
29th day of August, 1825, and the records thereof be and the saine
are hereby set aside and declared and directed to be held, deemed
and taken to be utterly null and void to all intents and purposes
whatever, so far as the same may interfere with or in any manner
affect the right and claim of the said plaintiff Charles Duvall, unto
the several parcels of land specified in the said return to the said
writ of fieri facias, by which it appears he became the purchaser
thereof as in the proceedings mentioned.

defendants may obtain a rule for further proceedings, &c. This will either oblige
the complainant soon to take out a commission, or will soon put him out of court.
And if a commission be taken out, a little diligence and vigilance on the part of the
defendants will obtain an early return of the commission; or put it in their power
to shew, that delay is sought by the complainant.

Now in cases of injunction, obtained on filing the bill, the Chancellor has always
thought it his duty to discourage, as much as he could, consistently with a fair
administration of justice, all studied or needless delay on the part of the com-
plainant.

It is ordered, that the injunction in this cause heretofore issued, shall continue
until final hearing or further order.

After which, on the 17th of December, 1803, by direction of the plaintiff, the
injunction was dissolved, and the bill dismissed with costs
obtain an early termination of this cause, the Chancellor must aver, that little delay

has proceeded from this court. He will go further, as he conceives he may do with
propriety, and suggest what is proper to be done for expediting the cause. The