SALE OF FARM AT SALISBURY

Press, Volume LXXXV, Issue 25969, 24 November 1949, Page 2

SALE OF FARM AT SALISBURY

APPLICATION OF-CROWN OPPOSED «PROPERTY ALREADY SOLD ” The property was already sold and the contracting parties did not want the Crown to take it, said counsel for the seller (Mr K. W. Walton) when opposing an application by 'the Crown that a 24 acre farm at Salisbury should be declared suitable for settlement by former servicemen, at a meeting of the Canterbury Rural Land Valuation Committee at Timaru yesterday. The seller was Mrs E. A. Gavigan. “The Rehabilitation Department has had ample time to establish refutation of the vendor’s contentions, but this has not been forthcoming,” said Mr Walton. His client had sold the property to Mr L. P. Gilmore, but would not have done so if she had not previously been told by the then Rehabilitation Officer at Timaru (Mr A. N. Campbell) tnat the department did not want the property for a serviceman. This assurance had been given after negotiation to sell to a serviceman had fallen through, in 1947. The purchaser later reinstated his application but Mrs Gavigan had been told then by Mr Campbell that his department did not want it. The Rehabilitation Department now, after considerable delay, had declared that it wanted the property and the Crown was now asking the committee to declare the property suitable for the settlement of a serviceman, Mr Walton said. “Surely the Crown- can intervene at any stage.” said the Crown representative (Mr N. H. Rawson). The committee was not to be bound by an irresponsible officer of a State DepartlPent,^ lf the statement was made bythe officer he said. It could be suggested that the officer concerned had acted improperly in usurping a prerogative that rested in the hands of the Minister, he said. The farm had been sold but now the Rehabilitation Department had found a man who was suitable. .Mrs Gavigan’s evidence had been given on oath and as there was no contrary evidence, the committee should accept it, said Mr Walton, when the deputy-chairmen <Mr B. S. Robertson) declined to accept the evidence of Mrs Gavigan. Mr Robertson said that Mr Campbell had no authority to tell Mrs Gavi--5?” . the Rehabilitation Department did not want the property. It was for the Minister of Lands to decide Whether the Crown woujd take the land but the committee could only de m!? e the P ro , n erty was suitable. The Crown valuation for the propVvzn wa m> £1356 ' a P d the sale price 4.1730. The property was valued bv M P c. L. Orbell at £1617. The com5 1 i'ft t /w„ <l^ ld0d „f o dec ' are th e property suitable for settlement under the act