CLAIM FOR POSSESSION

Hokitika Guardian, 21 August 1930, Page 3

CLAIM FOR POSSESSION

NGAHERE HOTEL LEASE. Annie Louisa Bernhard, of Kumara Junction, hotelkeeper, proceeded against Lemon James Manthorpe of Ngahere, hotelkeeper,* at the Warden’s Court, Greymouth on Tuesday before Mr W. Meldrum, Warden, for:— (I) Possesion of hotel and land .at Ngahere. (2) Rent up to August 1, 1930, (paid into Court). (3) Mesne profit as from August 2, 1930 to date of hearing, at £5 per week. (4) Such other relief as Court may think just. Plaintiff alleged that defendant had refused to comply with the conditions of the lease regarding the application for the obtaining of a renewal, and is now in possession of the land, and the hotel without any right or title. Notice to quit was served on defendant on July 1,193 J, but had not been obeyed. Mr W. J. Joyce appeared for plaintiff, and Mr J. W. Hannan for detendant.

After hearing evidence the Warden said that the agrecement was actually involved. The registered agreement between the parties, seemed to have certain things which were not included, hut which, according to the. original agreement included a purchaseprice of the lease, the stock and the 'furniture, on a walk in walk out arrangement. The clause XI. on the registered deed provided that in consider" ation of £650 paid by the lessee to the lessor, and of the rent covenants and conditions implied being kept, the lease he granted. There was no mention in the registered agreement of the £650 including the price of the stock and furniture which was taken over, out there was no doubt that portion of the consideration was included in tiwse. Clause 12 provided that in the event of the lessee not having exercised his right-of-purcha.se, then the lessor at the expiration or renewal of the lease would buy back the furniture and stock, hut limited the value of 'furniture to £250, and stock to a total not exceeding £SO in value. That ainuunt was included in the goodwill, hut it did not follow that £6OO was the total value. In some cases unnecessary stock had been pushed into hotels,. loading the lessor with stock having little use, hut holding a nominal' value. It was impossible to hold that in the, case oj renewal the same course would be gone over again, which amounted to a further goodwill being paid which included stock and furniture already paid for. Such an arrangement would place the les sor in the position of having to buy the stock and furniture back, and that was never intended. Had it been intended that the £650 be included in the renewal, that would amount to more than the rent over the term of 3} years, and it would have been a very grave oversight. It was a Jiuge item taking into consideration the terms in regard to renewal, and could hardly bo deemed to be inclusive in the words “terms and conditions.” He could only hold that “terms and conditions” referred to the covenants to keep the hotel in order, and comply with conditions of the lease. It could hardly be held to include such a large sum as £650. “The fact that it included furniture and stock forced me to the conclusion that’ it was not intended to include a further £650 in the renewal when granted, there I must non-suit the plaintiff,” concluded the Warden. Costs were allowed defendant to the amount of £2 2s, with witnesses’ expenses £1 13s 6d.