CONFLICT OF EVIDENCE.

Auckland Star, Volume 55, Issue 49, 27 February 1924, Page 5

CONFLICT OF EVIDENCE.

PLAINTIFF NDN-SIT.KD. t A claim for the return of £30. avhic.i ■Albert Hugo Kortli i.Mr. t.regorv'i illeged lie bad placed for sate keeping 'with the Anchor Exchange and Loan iConU'iinv. Melt/.er Bros. .Mr. Hogbeni. i was 'heard by Mr. W. B. M.'veiiii. a; I ihe Magistrate's Conn. I__ Plaintiff said thai be bad had deal lings with the defendant's firm fur about ! three years, and in -Inly. l!>_2. 1..- av.ut to the premises to redeem some pledges. While doing so lhe defendant noli.-. ] that plaintiff bad a fair sum of moncv with him. and lie remarked tion plaintill' should place some of the uvuiea in his (defendant's! care for safely. Plain tiff handed over ._:!(!. receiving :i avril ten acknowledgment, Ir had requested the money bad;, but it had not been given him. The defence was that the £M had been returned to plaintiff in th- aciual note deposited by him. Hoaa-ever. ,-.i,-!i ti:n<: plaintiff asked for money he was und-r the influence of liquor, nnd becauv of this no receipts were obtained from him. Mr. McKcan said tha: the ea idenee was eonflictins and the onu- r.ys on t lif j defence to produce receipt- -linwin:,' that the money had been repaid 1" plaintilT. However, the ea id-nee of the ! latter was unsatisfactory and plain'ill* | would be iion-snited with costs against him.