Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CLAIM FOR POSSESSION

. A. PECULIAR CASE. , His Honour the Chief. Justice < (Sir Robert Stout) hail before him in the Supreme Court yesterday the ease of tho Official Assignee in, bankruptcy of tho property of Patrick Carr against John Savage, of Masterlon, farmer. • Sir John Findlay, K.C., with him Air. 1). R, appeared for the Official Assignee, and the defendant was not represented by counsel. At the. outset the defendant asked for an adjournment, which was opposed by Sir John Findlay, who said that the application appeared io be part of a plan 'to'prevent the action coming oil for trial, The case had been going; on nojv for 'two years.. The facts of the c-aso were that the plaintiff was the registered proprietor of a parcel of land contain jus nearly nine- acres, situate at Te Ore Ore. near- Jlasterton, valued at about .£63o'. The plaintiff became possessed of Hie laud through the bankruptcy of Patrick Carr on June 1!), 1311, but at that date the legale estate was outstanding On March 22, 1915, it was dccreed iu an action brought by plaintiff against one Henry Nee, in whom the legal estate was vested, that it should be transferred to the plaintiff. Tho defendant, it was claimed, wrongly enteral into possession of the land some time during 1912, and continued in possession. The plaintiff, therefore, chimed possession of the land and .£2lO mesne profits, at the rate of XliO per annum. The defendant, claimed to he entitled to possession of the land by virtue of an alleged sain tp him from the Deputy-Offi-cial Assignee at Masterton for .£3O, which sale, it. was contended for the plaintiff, never took place. The defendant, coun-ter-claimed for specific performance in respect; of the alleged sale. . After hearing evidence. His Honour held that the. defendant had neither a legal nor, a moral right to the land, and gave judgment for plaintiff for' possession of the land and ,1:100 mesne profits and costs against Ihe defendant. The counter-claim was dismissed.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19190607.2.82

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 217, 7 June 1919, Page 8

Word count
Tapeke kupu
333

CLAIM FOR POSSESSION Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 217, 7 June 1919, Page 8

CLAIM FOR POSSESSION Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 217, 7 June 1919, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert