DEPOSIT ON PURCHASE.

Taranaki Daily News, 21 August 1920, Page 5

DEPOSIT ON PURCHASE.

INTERESTING LEGAL POINT. CLAIM FOR RECOVERY, - An interesting legal point was involved .in. a civil action heard at the Supreme Court at New Plymouth last evening, before Mr. Justice Salmond, in which Alexander Munro, farmer, of Haweva, claimed from Peter Theodore Pederson, late ofi Feilding, and now hotel-keeper of Inglewood, the sum of £317 deposit on sale of lease-in-perpetuity, consent to the transfer of which had been refused by the Taranaki Land Board. Mr. P. O'Dea, of Hawera, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. I. Neave, of Wellington, appeared for the defendant. The statement of claim set out that the defendant was registered as mortgagee of a mortgage to Leonard Jainos Ash\vorth, of Peilding, of the leasehold interest in the farm in question. On or about March 22, 1916, * default was made by Ashworth, and an older was made by the Supreme Court under the provisions of the Mortgages Extension Act, 1914, giving leave to the defendant to enter into possession of the property and also the right to sell the leasehold interest. The lands were put up for auction at the auction mart of Smith and Easton, Hawera, on behalf of the defendant, and the plaintiff was declared the purchaser. The plaintiff signed the agreement, and paid the auctioneers the sum of £317 as deposit, which sum was paid to the defendant. In May, 1920, the plaintiff made application to the Taranaki Land Board for consent to the transfer i of the leasehold interest in the lands from the defendant to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff did everything required of him in auch circumstances. The Land Board refused to consent to the transfer, and the plaintiff applied to the defendant for a refund of the deposit of £317, but defendant refused to refund same.

Evidence for the plaintiff was given by G. H. Bullard, Commissioner of Crown Lands, regarding tfu> refusal of consent to the transaction by the Land Board; by J. C. Smith, of Smith" and Easton, auctioneers. TTawora, regarding the auction sale; by ft. Hunt, of Mokoia, farmer, to the effect that he had offered £2,700 for the property, and by the plaintiff. It was contended by Mr. O'Dea that as the consent of the Land Board had not been obtained there was no valid sale of the property. For the defence, Mr. Xeave submitted that the; conditions of sale ;vere so worded that it was for the plaintiff, Munro, lo get the consent of the Land Board, and that whether he got that consent or not he must forfeit his deposit if the deal was not completed. Mr. Neave did not call any witnesses.

Considerable legal argument followed between and iiis Honor, and decision was reserved.