NATIVE LANDS COURT. Wednesday. (Before, F. D. Fenton, Esq., Chief Judge, and W. Hikairo.)

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXVI, Issue 3891, 10 February 1870, Page 4

NATIVE LANDS COURT. Wednesday. (Before, F. D. Fenton, Esq., Chief Judge, and W. Hikairo.)

The Court sat at 10 o'clock this morning. Graham v. Lukdon akd Whitaker. — The judgment at the Court wasgiven in this case, which had reference to Kauwaeranga No. 14, in favour of the applicant, and an order of the Court made, that an amended certificate be issued declaring the date at which the order was made in the Court at Shortland to be the day of vesting the legal estate. —The amended certificate will not issue until the opponents shall have an opportunity of sending in their application to the Governor in Council for a re-hearing. The application will be made in about ten days from this time. —Counsel for the applicant, Mr. Macdonald ; counsel for opponents, Mr. Rees. Kauwaeranga No. 23 —James Hobne v. Lundon and Whitaker. —Messrs. Macdonald and Hay appeared for applicants; Mr. Rees appeared for the opponents. — This was also an application for the issue of amended certificate of title in respect of the block of land known as Kauwaeranga No. 23. —Mr. Walter Grey, clerk in the Native Lands Office, produced the certificate of title, and stated that no Crown grant had been issued in respect of the land — Mr. John Charles Young, licensed interpreter, proved the attestation of the deed conveying the land from Aperahama and sevea other native owners to applicant, and that the natives knew the terms of the deed when he interpreted it to them.—At this stage of the proceedings, Mr. Kees submitted that the applicant had no locus sfcandi in Court, inasmuch as the deed was dated two months before the date of the order of Court. —The objection gave rise to considerable discussion. It appeared the certificate of title was issued under an error, and that it was not intended it should issue. —The Chief Judge said that the objection raised went to the very question of jurisdiction, and he should not like to proceed further with the case until he had carefully considered the matter. —The further hearing of the case was adjourned until Monday, 21st March. There being no other cases for hearing, the Court was adjourned until the date mentioned.