KAIAPOI.

Press, Volume XLVII, Issue 7700, 4 November 1890, Page 3

KAIAPOI.

: Monday, Novembeb 3. (Before C. Whitefoord, Esq., R.M., and G. H. Blackwell, Esq.) <3ivitCASß.--N.Kldd vj. Dlppenhelm, £613s 6d, for saddlery; set-off £5 8s 10d. for meat supplied and cash lent. Defendant admitted the claim, and tendered £1 9s Bd. Evidence was heard as to the meat account, and the Bench considered the evidence contradictory as to a loan of 10a. Judgment for plaintiff for £1 17s in addition to amount paid in. Interpleader Suit.—Janet Robins v "W. R. May. In this case defendant in the suit of May v F. Robins, obtained judgment and issued & distress warrant against furniture claimed by Mrs Robins. A letter was handed in which, after explanation from Mr Robins, the Magistrate read, hut stated he declined to receive any communication in respect to cases except in open Court. The letter was from Mrs Robinsasklngfor an adjournmentf to obtain evidence from Dunedin. The Resident i Magistrate tfssked what the nature of this evidence would be, and was informed that it would be to the effect that at the creditors' meeting of Mr Robins it was proposed and carried to hand the furniture to Mrs Robins* Mr May said on Saturday he had asked-the Official Assignee to send Mr Robins , a copy of the resolution passed at the creditors' meeting. At Che meeting three creditors attended, i and it was moved, on behalf of Mr Rice, ot Dunedin, seconded by himself, that the ! debtor's furniture be handed to him. F; Robins, sworn, stated Mr Rice Intended Mrs Robius to have the furniture, and it was to get his evidence the adjournment Vas sought. Mr Rice was one of the principal creditors in the estate. To defendant — Had received a 'letter from the Official Assignee, stating i how the motion was proposed. motion was proposed on Mr Klce'a bel>alf*~nW. R. May. sworn, stated he was at JjV Robins' meeting as a creditor. Ifc was nfoved, on behalf of Mr Rice, and seconded byhimself, that the debtor should receive his furniture. Not a word was said about Mr Robins. The Ben>ch agreed there was no need for adjournment.. Sufficient time had been given to put in a copy of the minutes of the Official Assignee, and no other construction could be put on them by bringing a witness from Dunedin to give evidence of what he might have itended. Mr Robins said if an adjournment was : not* agreed to j the plaintiff wished to withdraw theinterpleader. This was agreed to by the Bench, fctte bailiff's sale to proceed as directed by the Act.