SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3448, 11 March 1874, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

IN BANKRUPTCY.

Wednesday, March 11. (Before His Honor Mr Justice Chapman.)

Final Order.-—The case of Robert Boon Mason, for whom Mr A. Bathgate appeared, was, on the application of Mr E. Cook, adjourned to the 2grd instant.

Execution of Deed.—Complete execution of deed was declared in the case of Andrew Pollock, for whom Mr Macassey appeared. The case of Peter Melville Grant was, on the application of Mr i-:. Cook, adjourned to April 6. Final Examination,—ln the cases of David Henry Miller, and William Peardon Pearce, the 30tb instant was fixed as the day for final examination.

IN BANCO. Brockley v. Burt and another —ln this case, an appeal from a decision in the Resident Magistrate’s Court, Dunedin, Mr Macassey applied that it might stand over till the next Banco sitting, stating that Mr htewart, who appeared on the other side,

concurred in the application* The adjournment was granted. Ross v. Reith. —Mi* Macassey applied for an adjournment to the next Banco sitting in this case also, in the absence of Mr Stout. The adjournment was granted. Sutherland v. Bell. —ln this case, an appeal from the Switzers Resident Magistrate s Court, his Honor said that the case was defective; there was no averment stated in it, and that was necessary in stating a case. This neglect had, at times, been passed over, but that should not be done, in Victoria such cases were always sent back, and the practice should be carried out here. He (his Honor) would, however, have it again read over carefully, to see if there were the necessary averment. He thought ho should have to send it back. Otago and Southland Investment Company v. Burns —Mr James Smith applied to have leave extended till next Banco sit ting ; in the meantime the demurrer would be argued, and the question of estoppel be decided. Leave was granted.—Mr Barton, for defendant, applied for a rule nisi, and to enter a nonsuit, on the ground that the Judge had no jurisdiction to restore the case, and several other poin'a which the learned counsel argued at great length. The rule nisi was granted. White and Another v. M'Kellar and Another,—Mr Macaw sy moved fer a rule

nisi, to show why the rule obtained on Fehbruary 2 should not bo amended.-—Mr Barton said his side were anxious that the rule be argued at once.—His Honor granted the rule applied for, to be argued on Friday next. O’JKane y. Waste Land Board op Otago. —This appeal case was postponed, by consent, to the next Banco sitting.