RESTRAINING A SALE.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLII, Issue 1014, 16 November 1917, Page 3

RESTRAINING A SALE.

MONEY• LENDER AND FARMER AT

LAW. Tlie Supreme Court was occupied voider clay afternoon .with the hearing' nf an application f‘>r an injunction brought by isauui William Turner. fanner, Feilding, to restrain Erucat Albert Edward llarion, money-lender, of Feilding, from soiling: plaintiff's land. His' Honor Mr Justice Lliapman was on tho nom-li. .Mr 11. I’. Cooper, with him Mr .1. E. Havana git. appeared for the plaintiff, and Air Murphy for defendant, In his statement of claim, plaintiff staled ho wits the owner of £O3 acres, ami in .August, 1915, d- b ndani agreed to lend plaintiff £2020. ■■nred on the equity of plaintiff's land, •, rk and implements. and a. wool lien o', or the dip of plaintiff’s sheep of (he, following o-a ou to :,cure tin money and o . vs'. I’iaLmitV lv.l paid from lime ,n time lar:;. -iiins in payment of interest Jue and becoming duo in reduction of the principal sum. (An November 27, 1916. de-ft.-ml ant wi.de plaintiff inquiring payment of the a mount then owing by March 2, 1917, and requested that all moneys received hum the -ale of stock or wool be paid into defiiKlani L accouiu at the Bank of New Zealand, Fcildmg, and that, no sale of any mortgaged propcity made without defendant's written consent. On January 9, 1917, defendant verbally informed plaintiff that if he would pay info _ tie-fcmhui-t’s; account nil money,* derived from the sale of wool and stock from the sto< k. defendant, would not- require payment of the aniounf. due in accordance with the terms of the notice, but would allow th" account to run on. Without any notice defer! dam; applied to the Registrar of live Supreme Lean t at, I’v.lniei v.ton to conducta sale by auction of the property. Elam fill had not made any default in the provisions or condition.-:. Defendant was iu» entitled to immediate, pavinent ot the moneys owing by plaintiff, and if t lies r.de took place'plaintiff would sutler irreparable damage. BlamtitV therefore asked trial defendant ho n strained by injunction front proceeding with the sale and from taking any other immediate steps to compel payment of Iho moneys. Defendant, in Im statement of defence, admitted that plaintiff had paid yanou-; sums; from time to time on tiio principal and not on the interest. On January 0, 1917, Plaintiff requested a further advance of £9OO to enable him to carry on. which defendant "ranted without prejudice to tiv notice calling up the* principal moneys, it nil plaintiff gave e receipt for the advance without prejudice to this (■-ailing no notice. Defendant admitted that on September 21, 1917, he applied to the ID gts- ’ trar to conduct a sale of tiro ierm, bin in--1 formed plaintiff by letter on July 5 ami August 9 of his intention to .offer me land i for’ sale through the Registrar, h\ that I plaintiff w.v; fully aware of defendants, intention Defendant dlaiipotl that plaintiff had made several defaults in observing the eonditicn? of agreement. D<*fenclan>- (m • tiier stated that plaintiff had initiatedtho-e p.-.v-eedlngs solely for the pin pose of Of la ving and defeating, the nghiy. and renm-die-j of dofondrnt.under tho r.aiu mortgage and said that- by reason of rucli delav and mismanagement of t-no laud by plainvifl, me .svemitv is being seriously impaired.. Plaintiff gave evidence on the. hues "t bis /viutenicut, arid said il ne we-e PA' ‘•' another year on tho farm, he was conltd«;:ii ho would home enu on tao right- nt-.o wnn something o> spare. i local argument was timen D-t evenin',, alter v inch hi.; Honor i-. -er.vn judgnviu.