A CLAIM FOR RENT.

Evening Post, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 120, 17 November 1909, Page 11

A CLAIM FOR RENT.

MAGISTRATE'S DECISION. Dr. M'Arthur, S.M., gave his reserved judgment yesterday in the case of Fanny Adair v. Dennis M'Carlhy, a claim for £98 15s 2d, rent pn certain property in tho Raumai district, Mcnawatu. The defence to tho claim was that the lease hdd boon merged in tho purchaso of the land, and that therefore no rent was due. There was seven months' rent diie when tho property was purchased. A leaso for years, said tho Magistrate, might bo determined by merger — that 13, whon there was a union of tho term with the immediate roversion, both being vested at tho same timo in one person in tho same right. In such case the reversion morgod, or drowned the term, beoauso thoy were inconsistent and incompatible. When the purchaser was himself lesseo, the exeoution of tho convoyance at onco determined all tho covenants in the lease, which subsisted between himself and tho vendor as lesseo and lessor. The above principle did not, however, cover any rent that might bo duo prior to the purchase. To cover such rent duo thoro would, in his opinion, require to bo either some consideration or some express agreement to tho effect that tho rent duo by tho lesseo and purchaser to tho lessor and vondor was waived. There was in tho present case no such consideration or agreement. He had then to look at the evidence to ascortain the position of the parties. With regard to one of the properties — viz., at Apiti, Dr. M'Arthur thought that a certain amount of fencing had to be done by the lessors which was not done. Plaintiff said that sho had agreed to allow defendant for tho fencing. "This would about square the rent," remarked the Magistrate, "as far as Apiti was concorned. As for tho rent on the other proporty, I think that it was rightly' olaimod by plaintiff. I disallow the claim for rent of the Apili piojier^y, and allow that for section;, 61 and 62." Judgment was thorefore for plaintiff for £55 Os 2d, and costs. Mr. Fair was for claimant, and Mr. Brown for defendant.