SALE OF A CHASSIS.

Auckland Star, Volume LVI, Issue 215, 11 September 1925, Page 3

SALE OF A CHASSIS.

A RECEIPT IN DOUBT. CASE TAKES UNUSUAL TURN. ACTION FOR RETURN OF CHASSIS. The case in which AA"m. Matthew Russell (Mr. Gould), garage proprietor, of Auckland, sought to reeoA-er from Leonard Kerr, of Te Puke (Mr. Cooney), the return of a motor chassis and aeces- ; sories, or in the alternative the sum of | £21-2, the cost of tho machine, and j further the sum of £67 1/ as special j damages, was continued before Mr. j Justice Alpers in the Supreme Court this j morning. The evidence of the defend- | ant, given yesterday afternoon, dis- ! closed that he had entered into a verbal contract with a man named Kara, or 1 Mitha as he called himself, to build a body on a chassis received from plain- . tiff. A specification for the work was i produced, attached to which was a re- | ceipt signed by Kerr. Defendant adj mitted signing the receipt, but denied all knowledge of the written specification. His Honor said that the document on which the receipt was pasted should be examined by experts. The matter was of the greatest importance, ami should be cleared up. Defendant had denied that he had ever seen the specification, and this implied a serious offence on the I part of somebody. Cyril Kerr, son of defendant, said he had never seen any specification. There was no paste kept in the shop. Mr. Cooney: Only when Kara is making an agreement for some work. His Honor: There is either a coni spiracy on the part of defendant and i his son, or the document is a forgery. Oscar Moller, of Bayswater, formerly an engraver, said he had been employed frequently as a handwriting expert. He had examined the documents, produced this morning. He found the stamp proi dueed to be fairly hard, and not likely jto be distorted with any great pressure. I He had not been successful in his endeavours to distort the stamp and get a similar impression. The document i showed an impression at the top that | was fairly hard, but the bottom was <' spread and blurred. On takhig ah impression on transfer paper and covering I that on the document the difference bei tween the two could be discerned. Wit- ' ness thought that defendant's stamp had been used, but that there had been two operations. Taking the receipt, witness could see it had been folded. Those folds did not correspond with i those on the main sheet of paper. To get the worn markings on tbe receipt lit would seem that it had been carried about. To Mr. Gould: I feel confident that there has been a faking of that impression. The judge said the Court was indebted to Mr. Moller for the way he had given his evidence. There were many jokes in existence concerning the expert witness, but they passed Mr. Moller harmlessly by. Sona Fakir Kara, hawker, stated in evidenc*., under examination by the : judge, that he saw the receipt writt. .1 j out. It was Avritten in the book before the slip was torn out of the book. Witness had the specification with him. After tearing the slip out, Kerr gummed it on to the specification, using gloy from j a bottle on the writing table. He then I put the stamp on. The sheet was wet with the gum, and the pressure with both hands caused a blur. Witness asked Kerr to initial the line at the bottom as it was not quite clear, but Ihe refused. The receipt had been in ! his pocket since, but when it was put on it was a nice clean piece of paper, just out of the book. j (Proceeding.)