TE KUITI S.M. COURT.

King Country Chronicle, Volume II, Issue 67, 31 January 1908, Page 3

TE KUITI S.M. COURT.

Friday, January 24TH, 1908,

[Before Mr H. W. Northcroft, S.M.]

Judgment went by default in the following undefended cases : —■ Gibson v. Meredith, £5 9 s anc ' costs £l los 6d.

Hat! a way v. Meredith, £4 4 s lIC^ and costs £1 Os 6d. JUDGMENT SUMMONS.

Franklin v. Langley : Ordered to pay the amount owing forthwith or, in default, 21 days imprisonment. LIQUOR.

Frederick Plier, charged with bringing liquor to Te Kuiti without having the some labelled, pleaded not guilty. After hearing evidence His Worship convicted accused, and ordered him to come up for sentence when called upon. WHITE V. HARDY. Mr Hine appeared for defendant. The plaint was found to be out of order, Mr White not having obtained the necessary authority to sue from Mr Stanton. Mr Hine said his client offered no objection to having the plaint amended, but Mr Stanton decided not to proceed as suggested, and the case was struck out. JOHNSTON V. BERRIMAN.

This was a case in which W. Johnston, of Waitomo, claimed £l9B 5s 6d from A. Berriman, of Pukekohe, for alleged misrepresentation in selling a property, at Waitomo, to plaintiff, which defendant represented to comprise 400 acres of fallen bush in grass, and which plaintiff claimed _to only contain 323 acres. Mr Hine appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Collins for defendant.

Plaintiff gave evidence in support of his claim and stated that he was brought to see the property by Mr Longdill, a land agent at Taihape, into whose hands Mr Berriman had placed the property for sale. After going over the property with Messrs Longdill and Berriman he finally decided t) buy the place at £2 an acre, and an allowance of £IOO was made for [second growth clearing. This amount represented 5s an acre on 400 acres. Later on when he (plaintiff) had worked the place for some time, he thought thgre was not 400 acres of bush felled, and he had the area surveyed by Mr 0 Adams. The survey showed the area to be 323 acres.

Cross-examined by Mr Collins: Mr Berriman may not have actually guaranteed that there were 4°°. acres of cleared land in grass, but it was advertised, and defendant told him that was the area. I don't remember suggesting to defendant that there was less than 400 acres. We only had the one conversation before concluding the sale. It was then the question of underscrubbing came up. The whole area of the section was 987 acres. The price first asked for the property was £2 5s per acre, but a deal was made for £2 an acre, less an allowance of 5s per acre for underscrubbing. Mr Collins: When you talked about the second growth did you not express a doubt about there being 400 acres, and did not Mr Berriman then offer you £SO to cover all shortages ? Plaintiff: No, shortage was never mentioned to me.

Mr Collins : Did not Mr Berriman mention, during the conversation, that all measurements were approximate ? Plaintiff: There was no mention of approximate measurements in my hearing. To His Worship : I went over a good portion of the clearings, and could have gone over all, but did not do so.

His Worship : Had you gone over the place carefully you would have noticed, had there been a shortage, would you not ? Plaintiff: No, it is absolutely impossible to judge an area accurately in bush country.

W. H. Adams, surveyor, of Te Kuiti, gave evidence as to having surveyed the property. The plan produced was correct and showed the felled clearing to be 323 acres. He had cut out the remaining bush into blocks for felling, and they agreed with the measurement shown.

Cross - examined by Mr Collins : There was some bush felled along the road lines, and he had allowed ifor that in places. He had had not allowed for another piece near the reserve. It was very small and he did not think it was more than an acre. He had allowed for what was felled up the stream. C. P. W. Longdill, land agent, Taihape, said he went over the property with Mr Johnston. He stated to plaintiff that the area felled and in grass was about 400 acres, including a piece at the back on the fence line which they did not go to see. The price arranged for the property' was £2 an acre, and there was an allowance of £IOO made for second growth. After they had been over the ground Johnston asked witness if he thought the area was there. Witness replied that it was hard to tell, but they had walked from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. Also Mr Berriman had his receipts for the bush felling and would know. It was understood the area was 400 acres. The Government estimate for a loan was that area. The acreage wa§ approximately given. Mr- Johnston said he woi\ld sqoner have it in bush than in second growth. As agent for the property he concluded the sale on the understanding that the areas given were approximate. He understood generally that Berriman's offer of £SO allowance was for second growth. He was absolutely clear that the areas mentioned were approximate. He thought he could get more for the property now thaii yfhen it was sold to Mr providing was ifl the sarrje state. Cross-examined by Mr Collins : No warr-antv wag given of exact areas. He considered that after plaintiff had inspected the property he bought it at his own risk. Andrew Berriman (defendant) stated that he put the place in Longdill's hands for sale. Subsequently Longdill and Johnston came and inspected the place. He took every care to let Johnston Vhat the ' amount of , down, and measurement of 1 fences were purely approximate. Mr Johnston remarked that he did not i think there were 400 acres of bush

down. After talking about the second growth he offered, plaintiff £SO. Mr Johnston wanted £IOO, and it was eventually agreed to allow that amount to cover all shortages. Defendant then detailed the various areas which had been felled, making the total acreage 402 acres. Cross-examined by Mr Hine : He would not swear there were more than 400 acres down.

Mr Hine : How do you account for giving a statement in writing to a land agent that there were 420 acres felled and in grass ? Defendant: I said approximately, and was prepared to Mr Hine: How do you reconcile the giving of a statement to another land agent that 450 acres were in grass ?

Defendant: It is a thing that is commonly done, for various reasons. A man may wish to conceal from his neighbours the fact that he wishes to sell. Land agents also do it for clients, but when a man comes tobbur} r he is told the figures are approximate. Mr Hine : Did you not deceive the land agents ? Defendant: No.

Mr Hine produced forms of authority to sell which defendant had given to different agents describing the area felled and in grass as 420 acres and 450 acres respectively. Mr Collins, in addressing the Court, submitted that the instructions given to the land agents formed no part of a contract, and were simpty words of commendation. He held that the giving of such instructions in no way destroyed the credit of defendant. Moreover, when a buyer had the opportunity of inspecting a property before purchasing, he purchased at his own risk. Mr Collins quoted various authorities in support of his contention.

Mr Hine, for plaintiff, contended that misrepresentation had been made by defendant, and the fact that defendant had stated excessive areas to different agents, proved intention to defraud. He also quoted authorities in support of his contention, and asked for judgment. His Worship in delivering judgment, said that taking the whole of the evidence it was only fair to assume that defendant had reasonable grounds for thinking there were 400 acres in the cleared ground. It had been shown that there - were areas felled which Mr Adams had not surveyed. The statement by defendant that the £IOO allowance had been made to cover second growth and shortages had not been controverted, as plaintiff could not swear that shortages had not been mentioned. Judgment would be for defendant with costs, £l2 17s Bd.