"Trivial Litigation."

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVII, Issue 7861, 1 July 1905, Page 2

"Trivial Litigation."

AN OUTSPOKEN JUDUE. At the Courthouse on Friday, the Deputy-Registrar of the Supreme Court (Mr W- A. D. Banks) read the deferred judgment of His Honour, Mr Judge Edwards, in the case of Allied Uayiey, of Stratford, v. Alexander Campbell, of Toko, a claim for specific performance in regard to an agreement for the purchase ot land in the Toko district. At the hearing 011 June 19 last Mr Malonc appeared for the plaintiff, and "Mr 'lk S. Weston for the defendant. . " I Ilis Honour remarked, in the emnse of a lengthy judgment,-Jliat' llic sole question in dispute betwfccn tin: flatties was whether or noi a small piece of land, containing One acre land one perch, was in the occupation of the tenant Svmefi at the date ol the agreement, between the parties. The piece in question, the. site ot an "earth slide," was upon the original boundary line between two blocks of land, and there was no access to it except through the land which was admittedly included in the sale, or through adjoining land of another proprietor. Regarding the deviation 111 the fence, His Honour was quite satislied that anyone who examined , the ground must necessarily have jsecn that at this point the fence was | not upon the true boundary, and 1 have understood the reason. The defendant had not examined the ground at this point beiore he purchased. His Honour, proceeding, said that the agreement was for the purchase of the homestead farm occupied by Symes, and he (Mi Justice Edwards) could not doubt that it included the small piece of land in question. If a farm was leased as a whole and the lessee entered into possession of the major part of it under the lease it was not necessary in older to constitute possession that he should exercise acts of actual" physical occupation ol i'vcry inch of it. In his opinion the defendant was therefore bound to accept the i;&usfer at the whole of tho land iu Syuies'{occupation, including the small piece of laud in dispute, and to pay for it at the acrea&e stipulated in the agreement. As to counsel's ap- ) plication for interest since defend- i ant's occupation, had there been notice of this specific claim, or for such judgment generally as the Court might consider plaintiff entitled to it was just possible that the present "trivial litigation" would not have been persisted in. His Honour did , not see his way to include interest iit the decree. Judgment was given for specific performance of the contract sued upon, with eonsts on ilie lower scale. 1 In stating that the minutes of the decree could it' necessary be settled ' in Chambers, His Honour remarked —"lt is to he hoped, howevev, that : the parties will return ;o common ; sense, and tlut i'.o further proceeding ■' in tile action will be necessary. It is ' Jameiuable to see ihm respectable • fanners squandering their money in 1 tin. subject matter of which . docs not exceed £lO in value.