SUPREME COURT.—SITTINGS IN BANCO.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4371, 24 March 1875, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.—SITTINGS IN BANCO.

Tcesdat, March 23. ' (Before Hia Honor Mr. Justice Johnsthn.) SOMERVILLE V. GROVES. Mr. Travers for the plaintiff, Mr. Hutchison for tho defendant. - - ■••• . r- - Tin’s case again came before the Court upon the motion of Mr. Hutchison, who moved to make, absolute a, .rule nisi, culling upon the plaintiff* to show cause why the execution issued out of the Supreme Cou rt upon the verdict obtained in: the Resident Magistrate’s Court, should not be set aside upon various grounds. It/ Will ibe .I'emembored that immediately upon judgment being given in the Resident Magistrate’s Court, plaiiltiff applied, under a clause in the Real Jiat ite Act, to issue judgment out of the Supreme ( ,’curt,'and thereupon a writ of Ji. f(i. v/as issued. ■ The proper interval of time not hating eli psod to validate such a proceeding, Mr. Hutchison 'applied to the Resident Magistrate to grant a re-hearing, which was granted, but it became ’necessary first to stay the execution of -the writ of Ji. fa., which object was accomplished by the granting of the rule nisi. In 'moving to make the rule absolute, Mr. Hutchison argued, .first, that the verdict being for a sum less than £2O, the case did not come within the scope and meaning of the clause in the Real Estate Act; anil, second, that the certificate had been issued in error, before the expiration of the three days within wHioh the defendant had the right of appeal ‘against the decision of , the Resident Magistrate. His Honor, analysed the language of the Act, and pointed out its ambiguities, which, however,' placed ho difficulty in the way of coming to a conclusion upon the first ground. The proceedings taken by the plaintiff, were quite irregular, and the rule would, therefore, be made absolute. Tho rule was accordingly made absolute, and the execution annulled with costs.