LANDLORD AND TENANT

Marlborough Express, Volume LIV, Issue 185, 6 August 1920, Page 4

LANDLORD AND TENANT

ORDER. FOR POSSESSION RE-

FUSED.

At the Magistrate's Court this morning, before Mr ¥. L. Hollings, S.M., George Patohett applied 101Ijossession ot a dwelling-house in Main fatreet, occupied by William Black. The complainant had sold the hou.'-» to a man named Thomas O'Sullivan and could nob complete the deal, as the tenant refused to leave. Mr W. T. Churchward appeared for complainant, and Mr T. F Rehjng defended.

Mr Helling said that the relationsnip ot landlord and tenant must be proved on the hearing of the action, and m the present case it was ad--1111 ted *U° SU°h relationshl l>

His Worship said that the defendant was Patchetfc's tenant and nob > Sullivan's. It- must be } >roved that legal notice was given, and until that as. tho reuancy Muid not be

George Patohett said that O'Sulli-' van completed the purchase about » ioitnight ago, within a day or so Mo tlien paid the balance of'the purl chase money He paid a deposit- previously. Ihe witness received the xent up to a fortnight ago. ' Ho vn» not now the owner of the house. U Sullivan had a house to iive in. /vo V, ouse purchased was required by ( Sullivan, and it was to give posseX won that the present actioiTW ti.lcen. Ihere was no agreement with itln-ek as regarded the tenancy, and no arrangement was' made as to at %£%r v- • —« xl^Jf ? Vorship sai,d that the law Prowded for a monthly tenancy in the al^enoo of an agreement. The witness said that the tenant did not ask for terms of tenancy He simply took the hollfie ftt 6 fl n r,H,r Was a «ood ten»nt. iw+i l lns Said that {t was dear that the tenancy was indeterminate and had. lasted for about 31 veara' MS Bit? V™ T* "MrLSdte Mis BUwk. To make a weekly tennrcy there mu^t be an agreement Patchett; was not tho ovrnST His Worship said' that the purcfc^aar cpuld be added as a co-pE-

Mr Relling replied that the defendoffluxion of time or a le«alS»-K W^f. <*» ¥<! notleenih?™ oan with six or ,^vm childr^ m, T>-.os unreasonable to turn IS * lact that there was no notioa to auit 0 Sullivan had never been iS™^ W and he had another hoSe to hP^dSte^^S^J h p^°f S r him to ™»t. Mot h^ asked Mr Goodwin about it S S o^v^loSeSn^S Sy 9 bit"S '"•. tried to 1 jv- hat> tlle defence of midm* hardship could not be set up ff the

iurther actions being brought. H"I hardship. The Housing Actof hit year provided that if undue haSshm could be proved the Court roil* refuse to make an. order, and in Ibo could give an order as asked. Ifi. lamily of seven . children under JS years of age to make room for Urn plaintiff or purchaser. There was n» c>\ ldenoa that the purchaser wanted the house for his own occupation, liie order must be refase<J. It was not a case far allowing costs. Tfie. tletendant would, of course, hnv<* to get out sooner or later. He « o'ild not go : on for ever pleading undnet hardship.