TENEMENTS AGAIN

Evening Post, Volume CI, Issue 51, 1 March 1921, Page 8

TENEMENTS AGAIN

MORE DISPUTES AND MORE

ORDERS

The consideration of tenement cases occupied Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court to-day.

The first case called related to a returned soldiers' house, or rather his application for possession of a house on which he had paid a deposit. He stated, through, counsel, that he had three children, but as he had no roof for them in Wellington they were living with his aged mother at Dannevirke, and consequently he never saw them. Moreover, he wished to get married —'"he had the girl, but not the house, and could not marry till he had both." The defendant said that he was bnilding a house for himself as well as two houses for others, but owing to the shortage of cement and labour difficulties ho did not think that lie could hope to occupy his own homo for about four months. He had a wife and one child, and had been in the house in question for fourteen years. The Magistrate ruled that the hardship fell more heavily upon the plaintiff than upon the defendant, who was a builder, and should, be able to look after himself, particularly as he had only one child. The next dispute was rather more complicated. An employee of the Union Company had been offered a position by the Victoria Laundry Company, one of the inducements offered being the use of rooms at the branch shop in Kent-ter-race. He was unable to take up his now •work right away, but waa given leave to move with his wife and two children from the room which they had occupied to the rooms above the shop pending the expiry of his notice to his old employers; However, he reconsidered his decision to leave their employ, for he was granted an increase in wages. He was asked £2 per week for .the place, but he held that £1 per week had been agreed on. The place was not worth £2 per week, for the house was in a very bad state, and he would move just as soon as he could, but he had nowhere to go. The Magistrate said that he considered the defendant had no right in the place. He had been given the place on the understanding that he would work there, and later refused to work and refused to go. An order was made that the man should .leave within a month.

Several other cases were adjourned to future, dates, among which were ten applications for the fixing of rents by the Conrt.

(Proceeding.)