OPUNAKE SAWMILLING CO. v. JOHN COUPE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXX, Issue 20, 10 September 1914, Page 6

OPUNAKE SAWMILLING CO. v. JOHN COUPE.

The decision of Mr Kenrick S.M., was read by the Clerk of the Court at Eltham on the 29th ult., in the case of The Opunake Sawmilling Company Limited v, John Coupe. The Plaintiff Company sued the Defendant for £BS Is 6d for rates and

rent in respect of a property leased by the Plaintiff Company to the Defendant and for £IOO damages for breach of covenant to fell, burn and grass part of .the land ■ comprised in

he lease. His Worship non-suited

the plaintiff in respect of the claim for rates paid by the plaintiff, and which the plaintiff sough to recover from the defendant, on the ground fjhat in the absence of a survey the proportion of rates payable by the defendant could not be assessed. Judgment was given for plaintiff on the.

balance of the claim for £BS 12s Bd. Included in this amount is a suni ; of £25. allowed < to the plaintiff compaiiy in respect ,of their claim for damages but less au;amount of £25 an admitted set off,., the defendant was ! given credit for. , The Plaintiff Company

had, subleased certain' 'lands'' to the defendant for .a term of (i years from the Ist June,, ,1906. At itlid 'time' the! sub-lease was entered into, it vyas'in J tended to register the sub-lease, but upon the document being produced for registration the District Land Regis-

trar refused to register until certain portions reserved by the plaintiff company had been surveyed. The sublease was, therefore, never registered. It, Ivasj argued for the defendant that the Magistrate's Court had no 1 'jurisdiction tp ientertaim iflaims 'based on such unregistered lease where an alternative claim for use and occupation is not,set put-in the plaintiff's statement, of ,fikiina ;; the' course of his judgment MrKenrick de'eided Upon't'he

authority of "Priest v. Kinross White and Another" reported in the 15 Gazette Law, Reports at page 393, that the Magistrate's Court had jurisdiction to decide a claim for rent under such a sub-lease even though an alternative claim for use and .occupation is not alleged by the plaintiff. ■Judgment was formally entered at

the Magistrate's Court, Eltham, on the 9th instant for £6O, 12s 8d and £l7 7s Id court costs and witnesses expenses. On the application of Mr Crump, security for Appeal was, fixed at the amount of the judgment, £77 19s 9d and £lO costs. Mr J, R. L. Stanford, of Stratford, appeared for

the plaintiff company, and Mr T. B Crump for.,defendant. . .