BOUGHT IN.

Evening Post, Volume LXXVII, Issue 137, 11 June 1909, Page 4

BOUGHT IN.

AN ISLAND BAY SECTION. THE CASE OF BRAY v. KUCH. Hearing 'of the case of Bray v. Kuch, which occupied the attention of Mr.-Jus-tice Sim the whole of yesterday, was concluded kite in the afternoon. The plaintiff, Samuel " George Bray, carter, claimed of the defendant, Lena Kuch, wife of Frederick Kucfe, pork butcher, specific performance of an agreement for the purchase by the plaintiff of a section at Island Bay. In the alternative he sued for £250 damages. Mr. 0. Beere appeared for the plain,tiff, Mr. D. M. Fmdlay for the defendant. In the case for the plaintiff it was al leged that the defendant had refused to accept payment of monthly instalments by the plaintiff, and that he had finally sold the section, by public auction, buying in himself. The defence was that he had a legal right to such proceedings as the purchase money was in arrears. John Reuben Skelley gave evidence as to the section at Island Bay to which Mr. Kuch. wished Mr. Bra-y to remove. John Ernest Bray, cousin of the plaintill', said he heard Lambert, Kuch's representative, say that if the Brays did not clear out, a warrant would be issued against them. This concluded the case for the plaintiff. • Mr. Findlay, in opening/ the case for the defence, said the position of the patties, prior to the sale and at present, was the same. The defendants offered to reinstate the right of the plaintiff, if he would pay expenses. He said he " would only pay the amount of the arrears due without costs. The defendant was still prepared to accept the arrears and the costs of ' this action and reinstate the agreement. The defendants would not require the costs in a lump sum. The real and substantial difference between the parties was the refusal of the plaintiff to pay costs. Th6re was an absolute agreement in the amount alleged to be due. The case for the defence was that the plaintiff was inarrear in December last, and there was no further payment. Thomas S. Lambert said that under instructions from Mr. Kuch he had numerous interviews with the plaintiff. At the «nd of January there were arrears exceeding £20 in the instalments due. The transfer of the section was to be free of cost and the plaintiff was to get all the buildings which wore Mr. Kuch's. Further evidence was given by Norman Hugh Hogg, law clerk, and Frederick Kucn, husband of the defendant. His Honour reserved judgment.