A LAND CASE.

Otaki Mail, Volume 26, 11 July 1919, Page 4

A LAND CASE.

BSFOSE THE APPEAL COURT, A case on appeal from a judgment on a motion to determine questions arising under a decree came before the Appeal Court on Tuesday last. The suit was between Richard and 'William Bevan, appellants, and George, Thomas and Robert Bovan, Ellen L. Phillips, Ellen Bevan, Margaret Noes, Jane Bull, and the Public Trustee, respondents. In a judgment given by Mr Jusitee Stringer, it was stated that a motion was made to determine certain Questions which had arisen in the carrying out of a decree on April 19th, 1915. The first question was the proper amount of rent payable by the plainfiffs as lessees under a lease dated September 21st, 1908, from Thomas Bevan, sen., and Haana Pewene to Edward Bevan, so far as it might bo modified by an agreement by way of compromise entered into on March 28th, 1913, a memorandum of instructions for an agreement dated September Bth, 1910, and a deed undated and unsigned by Edward Bovan, but expressed to be made between Edward Bevan, Thomas Bovan, sen., and Haana Pewene. His Honor, in giving judgment, stated that the rent reserved by the lease was a single rent of £l5O a year. By the memorandum of instructions it was provided that on the death or bankruptcy of the lessee, Edward Bovan, the rental should be increased to 5 per cent on the current Government valuation. This memorandum was signed by Thomas Bevan, sen., and Edward Bevan, but not by Haana Pewene. Subsequently a deed was prepared fur the purposo of giving effect to these instructions, and this deed (undated) was signed by Hannuh Bevan and Thomas Bevan, sen., but not by Edward Bevan. The joint effect of those documents was, in the opinion of his Honor, that on the death or bankruptcy of Ed ward. Bevan, the lease was to be so modified that the rent should be 5 per cent upon the current Government valuation in lieu of the rent of £l5O a year. Edward Bevan died on Juno 9th, 1911, at which date there was no separate valuation of the lands included in the lease, and it was contended for the plaintiffs that such being the case, no readjustment of the rent as contemplated by the parties in the event which_had happened could be effected. In the opinion of his Honor, this contention could not be sustained. There was, in fact, at the death of Edward Bevan, a Government valuation of lands included in the lease, although such valuation also included other lands not comprised in the lease. He saw no difficulty in ascertaining from the Government Valuation Department what praportioa of the valuation of 1911, which included the leased aud other lands, was properly attributable to the lands included in the lease in question and readjusting tho rent accordingly. The second question was, what were the rights of tho plaintiffs and Robert Bevan under the terms of the lease and other documents as to the parcel of land, Part Manawatu Kukutauaki, 48, No. 2, purchased from Hakaraia Te Whena, or his successors. His Honor’s answer was that the plaintiffs had no rights against Robert Bevan in respect to the land. After argument the case was adjourned. The Bench comprised tho Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), Justices Cooper, Sim, and Herdman. Mr C. H. Treadwell appeared for the appellants, and Mr M. Myers for the respondents.