MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXVII, Issue 148, 25 June 1896, Page 5

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

THIS DAY

(Before Mr H. W. Northcroft, S.M.) . PNDEFEJIDtD CASES. .

Judgment was given for plaintiff in tha following undefended cases:—H. and J. Binsted v.'P. Bafehurat, £16 15-. 9J ; H. H. Hayr v. A. H. Barnett, £1 9s ; . J., Sill v. J.R. Fraser, £3210*; A. Cleave and Co. v. J. H. Walsh,.£4 Is lid; WinguU and Co. v. G. F. Thorpe, £1 15i 6at; E. A. Price v. H. Lucas, £v 135.3d ; Milne ami Choyce.v. H. Bloxum,. £1.9* 5d ; Kemp thorue, Prosser and Co. v. J, 0. D. Quigl.ey, £7 8s 2d ; May Bros. v. F. Bradley, lfJ: 3d ; R. May v. G. Hope, £1 16s 6d ; >V. 0 Bruce v. J. Lepine (possession ot tenement and £2 13s 9d rent and costs). , ■ DEFENDED CASES, L. H. Netjjiegen, A. Hart and H. Har» v. E. GARNAtTT.—CIaim for possession of* house occupied by defendant and for £? 12s rent.—Mr Nicholson appeared fot plaintiffs and Mr Mahony for defendant For plain tihV case id was alleged that h 1894 plaintiffs (as mortgagees) advertiser. the property for sale by auction, but can celled bhe sale in view of an arrangement made with defendant (who was fonnerlj the owner) to become a weekly tenant at 10a per week. The rent was subsequent!; reduced to 6s per week. The defendant had received notice to quit, but had declined to give up possession.—For the defence, ib waß alleged that defendant had not held possession as tenant, bub as owner ; that she paid no rent to 'rilaiotin*, bob'poly interest; and tbab her Jss»ty of redemption bad rot been extinguished.— His Worship reserved judgment to enable film to consider the law on thfl §pjjj||isn. ~