Source: British Record Society
Title: Abstracts of Wiltshire Inquisitiones Post Mortem, Returned into the Court of Chancery in the Reigns of Henry III, Edward I, and Edward II. A. D. 1242-1326. Edited by Edw. Alex. Fry , 1908, London, 341
Date: 28 June 1307
Place: Marloberg

The Abbess of Shafton

Inquisition taken at Marloberg before the King’s escheator, 28 June, 35 Edward I [1307], to inquire if it be to the damage or prejudice of the King or others if the King shall grant to the Abbess of Shafton that she may have again and hold to her and her successors 2 virgates of land in Medebirn of his fee which she acquired to herself and her house of William Giffard, after the publication of our statute concerning lands and tenements not to be put to mortmain, without having obtained our licence thereupon, or not, etc., etc., by the oath of John de Chilton, John Russel, John son of William, John Attebrigg, Roger de Thornhulle, William Pluk, Elias Pride(?), Henry Saucer, Thomas Digon, John Attemulle, John Toky, and John Witlok, who say that
...
Chan. Inq. a.q.d., 35 Edward I, File 64, No. 4.

Marloberg is probably present-day Marlborough.

In feudal England, escheat (pronounced eesheet) referred to the situation where the tenant of a fief died without an heir or committed a felony. The fief reverted to the King's ownership for one year and one day, by right of primer seisin, after which it reverted to the original lord who had granted it. From the time of Henry III, the monarchy took particular interest in escheat as a source of revenue.
From the 12th century onward, the Crown appointed escheators to manage escheats and report to the Exchequer, with one escheator per county established by the middle of the 14th century. Upon learning the death of a tenant, the escheator would hold an "inquisition post mortem" to learn if the king had any rights to the land. These were often preceded by a "writ of diem clausit extremum" issued by the king to seize the lands and hold the I.P.M. If there was any doubt, the escheator would seize the land and refer the case to Westminster where it would be settled, ensuring that not one day's revenue would be lost. This would be a source of concern with land owners when there were delays from Westminster.
Source: Wikipedia