SUPREME COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIV, Issue 64, 8 March 1902, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

Friday, March 7th.—Before His Honor j Mr Justice Conolly. 1 DUNLOP V. CAHMIOHAEL. \ Mr Samuel for the plaintiff. No ' } appearance of defendant. Mr Samuel said this was an action ' to recover possession of a farm at Merem»re from one Carmichael. j Dunlop, bought the farm at auction, ' subject to certain conditions, -ui-i Curmicnael received notice to quit, and ' full particulars of sale, He has taken no steps to quit the farm, but has cut ' grass seed and carried it to an adjoin- ' ing farm and threshed it. MrSimuel ' called James Dunlop, a farmer residing at ' Meremere. His farm adjoins the ' farm, the subject of this action. Ho bought the land at public auction at the West Coast Farmers' Association iat Hawera, commonly called "The ! Mart," on the 14th December. Htard the conditions of sale. It was sold under conduct of the Registrar of the Supreme Court. The price was £285, and subjecUo a Mortgage of £SOO and £lB 19s 6d accrued interest. He paid the balance of the purchase money on the 6ch January, and obtained a title produced (certificate of title put in and particulars of financial arrangements made). Produced notice to Carmichiel to quit signed by bim, which he instructed his solicitor to serve" on Carmichael. He has continued in possession. About half the cleared land, between 50 and 60 acre?, wera shut up for seed when he bought. Part of the land is in bush. The grass seed has been cut and carried away since this action com menced. Estimated the value of the grass seed over and above cost at £3O. His Honor said no claim was made for th-.t. Mr Samuel sud he was going to ask to amend the claim. His Honor was afraid ho could not allow tha\ It. might be madd the subject of a separate action, Mr Samuel: As your Honorplaases. WitnoHs continued the value of the grazing was abiut £5. Carmichael never mentioned ths matter to witness, and give no reason why he refused to give up possession. H. S. Elliott, managing clerk for Mr Oiplin, solicitor, Hawera, said Mr Oaplin acted as solicitor for Mrs Spraggon and sold the farm in dispuve through the Registrar of the iSupwrne Court to Dunlop, and as solicitor for the latter in completing his title. Witness then gave formal evidence of the steps taken to obtain possession of the property. He also tendered defen- ] dant the b ilance of the purchase money, £lls 5s Bd, together with the accouut. He then refused to accept the money, ' the account, or to give up possession, i Ho said he would see Caplin, Dunlop, and the money in H- fire before he would quit the property. A few days after this action was commenced. Mr Samuel said he was in a pcsition to put in a notice that was served on Oarmichad that the caso would come ■ on for hearing at this Court. His Honor said this was not necessary. It was a most extraordinary ] c»se to him, and there was no doubt plaintiff was entitled to possession and £5 damages. Judgment for plaintiff would be given for possession and £5 mesne profits; costs on the highest scale on the sum of £B9O. JURY V. MCGAEViB. Mr Wright (Wright and Hutchen) I for plaintiff. Mr Malone for defen- ' dant. . After opening his case Mr Wright II called Maurice E. Jury, who stated he • was a carrier at Stratford, and regis- | tered proprietor of 77 acres of land near Stratford. Leased it to R. McGarvie(agre"raent produced, dated sih Sepwmbtr, 1901). It include* h 1 bailment fur certain cows, The rent was £IOO yearly, payable quarterly in advance. The first quarters rent was paid. The next payment oame due but was not paid. Mr Wright said he would reserve the right to call witnesses to give ro--1 butting evidence if necessary. Mr Malone then proceeded to crossexamine witness, and the case was unfinished when the Court rose, and will be continued this morning at 10 o'clock.