LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 299, 11 September 1908, Page 2

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT. CIVIL SITTING, .LAND TRANSACTION AT LEVIN. KIBBLEWHITE v. SOMERVILLE. " CLAIM TO SET ASIDE A CONTRACT. The hearing of .the case of : James Henry. Kibblewhite and William Duncan Kibblewhite vorsus William George Somerville was continued before Mr. Justice * Cooper yesterday. ....... This was a claim to set aside a contract for tho sale by defendant, to plaintiffs of a property containing 709 acres at Levin,: arid to recover a deposit of : £1200, of the pur- ' chase money, £3700. The, ground on' which tho claim was based was that ono Robertson, who was in. the employ of defendant, had allegedly . represented to • plaintiffs that the property included a valuable flat, which, as a matter of-fact, formed a portion of the adjacent' property, which belonged to" one Cresivell: Mr. Morison appeared on behalf of tho plaintiffs, and Mr. : M. Chapman, IC.C. (with him Mr.' Dunn),-for the defendant. Evidence on behalf of tlie plaintiffs' claim had occupied the whole Of the previous day. .Mr. Chapman, in opening the case for defendant, said that there had been no misrepresentation as to the boundaries'of the property. , Arthur. Robertson, drover, deposed thatthe sale of tho property was prejudicial to his interests, as he" would get no more work from defendant. Witness received no commission in connection with tho sale of" the property: Ho conducted Mr. W. D. Kibblewhite over the property, and showed him a 'plan of it. Kibblewhite did not see tho whole of the boundaries, as ho had a bad back and said he would be satisfied if ho got • a rough idea of them. Subscouently Kibblewhite remarked that he was well satisfied with the property, but thought the price was rather high. Had witness tried-to deceive Kibblewhite with respect to the boundaries Kibblewhite could have "bowled him over" by reference to the plan. Cross-examined, witness stated that he showed about a dozen people over the. property. He had inspected half a dozen properties for defendant, receiving Bs. a day arid expenses. It was no part of his duties to point out tho boundaries to people who came to inspect the property in question. If' they wanted any- information he gave it to them, but defendant had instructed himthat if they had the plan of tho property they would be all right. W. 0. Bcere, licensed surveyor, thought that anyone who intended to purchase a property of the description of tho one in question should go over the land in order to become acquainted with the boundaries. William Lingard, land and estate agent, stated that he and a client had no difficulty in picking up tho boundaries when Robertson was showing them over the property. . Evidence was then given by Thomas' Rogers, Gilbert Hare, Win. It. : Aislabie, arid Robert Hare. Defendant (sworn) stated that he became tho owner- of the land in question in September, IDOG. He paid £6 10s. per acre for it. Altogether, he spent about-£SOO in improvements upon the place. 'He gave plaintiffs a full and accurate description of tho property, also a plan of it. When he (defendant) purchased the property ho had no difficulty in locating the boundaries. At th) 3 stage the Court adjourned until this mornins.