S. M. COURT.

Otaki Mail, 12 September 1923, Page 2

S. M. COURT.

OTAKI—THIS DAY. (Before .1. Kogan Stout, Esq.. f-.M , Reserved Judgment. Te Horo Dairy Co. v. R. J. King— Claim 197 Ms sd, and counter claim 597 Ms sd. Reserved judgment given in this case for I lie Cihii|iiiiiv for its claim of £97 ,'js oil, Court cost, £2 17s. solicitor’s fee £5 I7s. .1 udgmet: was also given for the Company again,: defendant on his counter claim if £l»7 Ms .5,1 with solicitor's fee £.5 17Mr. Atmore appeared for the Compton and Mr. Cooper for defendanl. A J,tailed report of the judgment will a; pear in our next issue. The elicit of litis decision |s to enable thc Company to recover advances, made to supplier., on the expectation of the 1921 hutita exceeding £lgno. Theft of Wine. Three young men, Gordon. Tnipst:i. and Rikibana were charged with the theft of a case of wine, valued at £2". the property of T. I". Lyons, proprietor of tile Family Hotel. Defendants. >: fended by Mr. Dunklev. pleaded guilty. Constable Greggan said the port wit.was left in the back yard of the hotel to be returned to Wellington, it ivte taken and hid i:: the lupins, and my. morning the young fellows inteii'led to return it, but failed to do so. The net was one ol' mischief and pract ieally none of the contents were taken. Mr. Dunklev pleaded for leniency, staling the act was done while the hid* in-re under the influence of liijimr, and in a half-sodden condition, and which in their sober senses would not hare done, removed the cask. He though: a conviction against Kikihaua wouH be sufficient and suggested a fine Ot each of the others, lie thought tin* would meet all cases. The s.M. lined Taipua ami Goriloi each £.5, in default 1 1 days, and liii:. liana £2. in default 7 days, the litc- to be paid at once. He hoped the youth' uould take tiie opportunity of tilt chance given them and added that £ they appeared before the Court a gait on a similar charge, they would be —::: to goal. Unregistered File-Arms. Police v. il. IK Bdl- {Mr Stav.-ie?; --Charge oi in mg in possession of at •Mifejcistered shot gun. Defendant fdeaded guilty, .utd in doing so 1 -.; ' ed that he had made application c' registration and was told there no forms available. He suppled • particulars to a relieving constable*. .v*' : later told Constable Satherley ot tl< gun. He had no desire to evade law in any way.- —Case uisinisscd. Maintenance Order. R. C. Berry v. Police —Applied* for variation of a maintenance mmars being £25 ss. Mr F*'l'l-l'-’ appeared for Berry. The ij.M. agiecd that a pertios the arrears (£1.5; be remitted, b ". payment on thc order in future wo';--have to be kept up. Judgment Summons. Abraham and Williams Olr. Dtn ley) v. i. I’. Lewis, claim £22 2- L DefeniJaut .stated he had four depe--ants, and was not in a position to p-d any of the amount. —No order. Claim Tor DamageE. A. -J. Mier.-. (Mr. Dunklev - T 9 Grant (Mr. Sstaveley),—Claim £2. for damage through collision calves. —Case adjourned. False Pretence'Police v. a. K. Borland— Charge obtaining from T. P. Lyons the suift r£2 by means of a valueless cheque. A second charge in which money obtained from K. H. Williams w«* heard, while Borland was also cliar?' with making a false document, 'o "( a cheque for £3 drawn on the Bar.-: -• Australasia, and purporting to be -’g' ed by L. G. Lowry, and uttering -any to Mona Noble with intent to detra'CAccused was committed te t; | .Supreme Court at Palmerston North sentence.