RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT TOKOMAIRIRO.

Bruce Herald, Volume VI, Issue 402, 24 January 1872, Page 6

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT TOKOMAIRIRO.

(Before Mr J. P. Maitland, RM.)

Tuesday, 16 th January

Kinder v. Jowitt — Mr Jones for plaintiff. Mr Ttylnr for defendant. Plaint — That on tliß 20ih and 21st day of November, 1871, the defendant being- in occupation of the land hereinafter mentioned as tenant thereof under the plaintiff unlawfully pulled down the dwelling-house, stockyard, shed, and piggery, then being 1 <»n ['Sections 1 of 27, and 2 of 27, block 6. Hillend distri«r, and also pulled up ihe fruit trees growing in and upon the said land, and removed and carried away the timber, ma'erials, and fruit trees, and uppm|)riare.l "lie same to his own use, to the plaintiff's damage of LOO. Pleas — Ist. The defendant except as to so much of the declaration as relates ro the pulling up and carrying away of the fruit trees growing in and upon the land therein mentioned, and to the appro- Hating of the same to the use of the defendant, says that he is not guilty. 2nd, The defendant as to the said fruit trees brings into court the sum of L 2 14«, and says that the said sum is enough to satisfy the claim of plaintiff, in respeu 1 " of the mutter herein pleaded to. 3rd. Th.it at the. time of the alleged conversion in the plaintiff's declaration mentioned, the said dwelling-house, stockyard, shed, and pi-j-irery, were not the property of the plain'iff. Thursday, 18th. The Magistrate in giving judgment, remarked on the very satisfactory similsiri'y in the principal por ions of the evidence yiven by both plan iff and defendant. Ir appeared that the. land referred to lielon<red to one M off at, and was under a^r^ement of lease to Jir.vitt — that. Moff.ir. in Maryh. 1869, wanted to sell, and that Jowitt hail offn'-ed for the land ; but that ultimately Kinder became the purchaser — that an agreement had then been entered in'o between Kinder and Jowitt, to the cffec that if Jowitt removed within tweke months he was to be allowed to remove the hon«e, stockyard, and pinery, he had erected. It was clear there was an under s r andin»" that. Jowitf's agreement of lease with Moffat should be cancelled. KinderV evidence, represents the motive in all nviuji the buildings, &0., to be removed, was to g*t rid of the lea>;e. Jowitt' s evidence, represents th« motive to have been, his withdrawiriir irotn competing for purchase of land This does nut affect the fac, that they boh ngree that Jowitt was to be allowed to remove the buildings with iu one year. Before the year expired Jowitt not finding it convenient to remove, made, a new arrangement for extension of lime <in-l paid Kinder L 1.3. 3 for one year longer, and until he removed at t!ie same rate. Now here appears the point in dispute, Kinder says that there was nothinu tben said as to the buildings Jowitt s«y* that the, riulif to remove was still continued. Looking to the whole fact*, he (the Magistrate) was inclined to think the probabilities were in favor of Jowirt's statement. He thought it unlikely that Jowitt would pay LIS ami give up his right to remove the buildings, as such a vent would be out of all proportion, to ;he value. Judgment for the amount paid into court, L 2 14s. Mr Taj'br applied for costs, and argued that virtually his client had gained the case, and therefore should not he charged with costs after paying- the L 2 14-* into court.

His Worship could not sen his wav clear to grunt Mr Taylor's application, but on h^ino- pressed, n^repd to reserve the question of co<ts in the meantime.

Wednesday, 17th* Henderson v. Shaw. — This was an assault, case.

Tlie Miig'istrate in giving judorment remarked that the evidence came before Lira " tainted " to such a degree that he could not at all satisfy himself, who to believe. M'Donald's evidence he placed most reliance upon, but it- was possible, be thought, that Shaw mijrht have, struck the first blow without M'Donald seemg 1 it, at all events, it was clear that he gave the first provocation, and besides being on horseback he might have ridden a way. As he had said, however, the evidence revealed such a disgraceful state of • matters,: and was so strongly " tainted ' that he could come tp.no other decision than to dismiss the case. He felt that if he had the power it would be his duty to bind over, the vvhdle ofthe parties to keep the peace. Case dismissed.— each party to pay own costs.

M'Pherson v. Shaw, snr.— Case dis-missed-r-each to; pay ow,h costs. . ';.

v. Shawj-j-j'nr. — The Magistrate said that there was a slight assault pr.bved, as Sba^, jnr M .;had followed Rafter c M^herson,;and as it 'appeared struck a blow 1 ; -^Fined 10s and costs. ;: 7