ASSESSMENT COURT.

Kumara Times, Issue 2384, 19 April 1884, Page 2

ASSESSMENT COURT.

Friday, April IS. [Before J. Giles, Esq., Judge.] The sitting of the Assessment Court for the revision of the Valuation List for the Borough of Kumara was held to-day. The following is the official record of the proceedings : John Manson had objected in that his name was inserted on the Valuation Roll as owner of section No. 45, Seddon street, and that the valuation of the same, at £6O, was excessive.-—The objector, however, did not appear, and the valuation was ordered to stand. Henry Fitzsimons appeared to object to the valuation of his section at £so.—The objector gave no reason; and the Judge said he thought it had better then remain as it is. He was not disposed to make the sweeping reductions he was asked, as it might injuriously affect the value of other properties in the town. Bazile Bremond objected in that the valuation of his property in Seddon street, an hotel and two shops, was excessive. The valuation of the hotel had been raised from £35 to £4o.—The Borough Valuator and Town Clerk stated that improvements had been made since last assessment. —The objector said the improvements had been effected since the property was assessed. The Judge ordered the valuations to remain as last year, viz., £35 on hotel, and £2O on two shops adjoining. William Keech, by bis agent Mr Seddon, objected to the valuation of sections No. 16, £35, No. 46, £2O, and No. 1, £55, in Seddon street, were excessive; also No. 137-38, £6, No. 66, £2O, and No. 83, £3, in Seddon street, were also excessive.—Section No. 16 was reduced to £3O, 137—8 to £5, 61 to £ls, 83 to £2 10s j whilst the valuation of sections Nos. 46 and 1 were sustained. R. J. Seddon objected in that the name ot James Holmes was inserted on the List as occupier of an office in Seddon street, whereas the said office was owned and occupied by the objector, whose name should appear on the List for same; also that the valuation at £25, was excessive.—Mr Seddou's name was ordered to be inserted on the Roll and the valuation was reduced £5. Mary Ann Ritson, by her agent, Mr Seddon, objected in that the valuation of her section, No. 47, Seddon street, was excssive.—The Town Clerk stated the valuation was the same as last year.—The amount, £SO, was ordered to stand. This closed the business of the Court, and the Judge said if the Town Clerk would make the alteration?, he would then sign the Roll. The Roll was afterwards signed.