MORTGAGOR AND MORTGAGEE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5414, 3 August 1878, Page 3

MORTGAGOR AND MORTGAGEE.

The case of Chalmers and Another versus Clarke and Another was for a long time before the public of New Zealand, and excited a great deal of interest. The following short account of it, taken from the Sydney Morning Herald, will, on account of the extreme importance of the subject, well repay perusal-: ; This is a unit of ft remarkable nature, which has for the last two years been before the Supremo. Court of New Zealand, and has excited much interest in that colony, as upon its final issue depended tho recovery of one of the -largest estates in Otago by its original owners, while it will. probably lead to the institution of similar proceedings by other parties, who may, like the in this cas*o, have been dispossessed of their properties, .but who may successfully exercise their rights of redemption against their mortgagees. Aa many properties in the colonies are siipi" .larly hold to the one forming the cause of the suit in question, tho following short partilars may bo fpund interesting. Tlie suit was; instituted by the plaintiffs, who were th>» mortgagors for tho redemption of the Moa Elat station and stock, in Otago, New Zealand, a largo and valuable property. In the year 1868 the property consisted of *159,000 acres of leasehold land, and 06,000 sheep, and tho mortgage debt was £35,000, or thereabouts. The mortgagee in the mouth of August of that year insisting that tho security waiT not worth tho amount of the debt, and treating the sale of some of tho stock by the mortgagors without his direct leave,- as a broach of one of i the covenants contained in

the mortgage, took possession, and advertised the properties for sale by public auction, the highest bid at such auction being £30,000, and for which sum they were knocked down to the son of the mortgagee as a purchaser. Shortly afterwards one of the mortgagors was, by this action of the mortgagee, compelled to take the benefit of the Insolvent Act, but before the commencement of the litigation had procured his to be released from insolvency.. Subsequently the mortgagee died. The suit was commenced some two years ago by the mortgagors against the executors of the mortgagee, the former treating the taking of possession and the subsequent sale as oppressive and illegal acts, and insisting that the property was worth vastly more than the amount of the debt in the year 1868, and that it would have brought vastly more at the auction in question if it had been properly advertised and proper terms of sale allowed, and excusing themselves for not having commenced proceedings earlier by reason of one of them having been out of the colony, and the other not being in a financial position to incur the heavy expenses of an' equity suit until shortly before proceedings were actually instituted. The question in contest was chiefly one of value in 1868. The litigation is now, however, aa wo are informed, determined, a compromise Laving been come to, under which the executors of the mortgagee have agreed to pay the mortgagors £75,000 in consideration of the latter making over all their right, title, and interest to them in the mortgaged prnpprfciea.