SUPREME COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume III, Issue 169, 20 July 1868, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

IN BANCO. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Kichmond). Ke Section 20. — Picton. His Honor said that before giving an order herein under the Sale for Non-payment of Rates Act, 1862, the Court required to be satisfied, that notice of the application had been given to the other side; that the sale of the whole of the land was necessary; and that the rate under the Picton Improvement Act, 1861, was not the rate declared by the Court of Appeal in Bagge v. Sinclair to be invalid. Ross v. Caverhill. Mr Pitt moved for leave to enter up judgment for the plaintiff on the award of the arbitrator. Rule granted. M'Arthy v. Allen. Mr Kingdon moved for the appointment of a receiver of the tolls over the Uile or Waitakari Bridge, near Charleston. Application refused. Trimble v. New Zealand Insurance Company. Dr Coombe moved for an order to stay further proceedings herein until August 14th. Mr Conolly, for the plaintiff, consented and the order was made. Jervis v. Tasker (Demurrer). Mr Conolly, with Mr Pitt, for the plaintiff. Dr Combe, with Mr Kingdon, for the defendant. It appeared from the pleadings that the plain-

tiff sought to recover from the defendant possession of a piece of land in Gladstone-street Westport, originally granted to Mata-nohe-nobi and Honi-mauhika, aboriginal natives (mother and son), and who, with Mata-nohe-nohi's husband, by deed of conveyance of 26th July, 1867, registered 2~th July, 1867, conveyed their interest in the land mentioned to the plaintiff. Defendant by his pleas set up two deeds of lease, one dated 9th July, 1566, from the husband alone, and another dated 9th October, 1866, from the husband and wife, to Adam Porter and John Blain, of the land claimed, but which leases were not recognised in the Office of the Registrar of Deeds at Nelson until after the registration of the conveyance to the plaintiff. The defendant further set up an assignment from Porter and Blain to him of their interest in part of the land leased, including the land claimed by the plaintiff, and which assignment was duly registered before the plaintiff's conveyance, and the plea further alleged that the plaintiff had notice of these deeds. The plaintiff demurred to these pleas, and in support of the demurrer Mr Conolly contended that, under the 17 th and 24th sections of the Conveyancing Ordinance of N. Z., the deeds of lease set up by the defendant were void as against the plaintiff; and further, that the Deeds liegistration Ordinance Amendment Act 1867, did not cure the defect in defendant's title. Dr Combe, for the defendants, argued at some length against the demurrer. The Court allowed the demurrsr, remarking that the Deeds JRegislration Ordinance Amendment Act of 1 867 did not cure the defect in defendant's title, that Act not having a retrospective operation. The defendant could amend if he liked, within 14 days, upon paying the costs of the demurrer, otherwise judgment would be for the plaintiff.