THE TAHORA LANDS.

Gisborne Times, Volume V, Issue 85, 19 April 1901, Page 3

THE TAHORA LANDS.

ADISPUTE. On AVednesday Mr AV. A. Barton, Registrar of the Supreme Court, delivered judgment in the matter of the Land Transfer Act, 1885, and in the matter of the Tahora No. 2 c 8, section 2, block 1 (Te AVera), and in regard to caveat re--3 garding the same lodged by the Bank of New Zealand. The Hon. Jas. Carroll, and AA 7 iremu Pere and Peka Kerekere, 1 the registered owners of the said Tahora 5 land, applied that caveat be removed on i the following grounds :.(1) That the said 1 Bank of New Zealand has no legal or equitable interest, nor any right of any ■ sort in or to the said land, Tahora, No. • 2 c 3, section 2 ; (2) that the title to the said land is free from all claims whatever save such as may be determined and approved by the \ r alidation Court, and is vested in the said Hon. Jas. Carroll, AVi Pere, and Peka Kerekere by tho decree of the Validation Court, confirmed by Parliament ; (3) that the dealings of the said Hon. Jas. Carroll, AVi Pere, and Peka Kerekere with the said land are not, and by virtue of the order of His Excellency the Governor in Council made in pursuance of the powers conferred by the Native Land Laws Amendment Act 1897 ; (4) that all such dealings as afoi'csaid have been made under the order and direction of the Validation Court ; (5) that the orders of the Validation Court have been made after due notice has been given and argument heard on -behalf of the said Bank of New ! Zealand, and such orders are orders of a ! Court of competent jurisdiction, having j exclusive jurisdiction over the subject , matters thereof ; (6) and upon any, every, I or fiirther grounds which appear in the i affidavit of AV. L. Rees sworn and filed. ( Mr Barton ruled : “ I am of opinion that the Native Laud Validation of Titles Act 1893 gives the Judge of the Validation Court full jurisdiction to make an order for the removal of caveat, and it appears to me that this matter can be more properly decided by the Judge of that Court. I therefore dismiss this summons, costs ' X2 2s. Ido not say that -I have no juris- . diction, but in my opinion the matter can bo more properly decided by the Valida- 1 tion Court,” y