RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.-Yesterday.

Thames Advertiser, Volume VII, Issue 1862, 19 September 1874, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.-Yesterday.

(Before W. ruASBR, Eiq., a.jr.)

H. Taipahi and Kapuna Maunganouu v. 0. Guant.—This was a claim of £3 Gd for rent, but it was stated that it had been settled.

H.Taipaua v. 0. Geant.—This was a claim of £1 16s per rent, which was also settled.

.Buydes, Evens, and Co. t. Wit. Kose. —Claim, £50 on a promissory note, —Judgment was confessed.

J{. Gkaham v. G . Epr,—This was an action of ejectment against one of tiio residents on Bloek No. sa. The clerk stated that it had been settled.

ii. Gbaham v. 0. McLean. — This was auother action of ejootment, which had also been settled.

P. Lempbiebe v. H.Tizabd.—Claim, ,£2Gs for goods supplied. —Plaintiff de< posed as to his clnim, and obtained a judgment with costs.

.■James -"ae v. E. 0. Young,-Claim: £11 <ls, for money lent. Mr Tyler appeared for thedefendant. Plaintiff deposed that lie lent defendant £11 and the money was still owing. In answer to Mr Tyler, plaintiff dopos.ed that, the claim was £11 dis with' the interest on t'io original sum. He bad a promissory into foi; the amount, He did, not know hoty

much ho lent him originally. It was more than £5, but he did not know how much it was.—Mr Tyler submitted that plaintiff could not recover, as he was suing for £11 4s, which was not the money lent. Ho ought to havo sued for the amount lent, and-interest, or on an account stated.—His Worship said to defendant that he would either give him a judgment for £5 and'costs, .or a nonsuit. —Plaintiff said he would take a judgment for £5 nud costs.