MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Manawatu Times, Volume LIII, Issue 6755, 7 November 1928, Page 2

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

»'»■»■' -j CIVIL DAY. In tho Palmerston North Magia trite.’s Court yesterday morning, Mr. J. L. .Stout S.M. delivered judgment for plaintiff by default in the following cases:—

Garner and Garner (Mr. Ongley) v E. Hatcher £3, costs £1 4s 6d; H. Baker (Mr 1 . Cooper) v. W. C. Erickson £1 ss, costs 15s; Eileen Eyan (Mr. Ongley) v. Eichard Eric Overend £5 5s 3d, costs £1 10s 6d; G. A. Luoni (Mr. Ongley) v. H. Ealfe £4 11s 3d, Costs £1 5s 6d; Leary’s Pharmacies (Mr. Abraham) v. F. Garrett £2 13s lOd, costs £1 ss. 6d; National Bank of New Zealand (Mr. Cooper) v. B. C. Smith £35, costs SA Is 6d; New Zealand Loan and Moreau tile Agency Ltd. (Mr. Cooper) v. D. J. Eeid £lO 12s 3d, costs £2 15s; W. V. Kingsbeer (Mr. Hutchison) v. H. A. Wagstaff £1 6s costs only; F. I. Colvin (Mr. Grant) v. H. W. Brown (Welling ton) £l7 Is Id. costs £2 _l4s; Justice and Edmunds (Mr. Hutchison) £lB Is Sd, costs 02 ids; J. E.‘ Lewis (Mr. Grant) v. A. W. McDonell £2 Bs, costa £1 3s 6d; E. C. Barnett (Mr. Merton) v. L. W. Sharman £4 3s 6d, costs £1 3s 6dj D. H, Bett (Mr. Merton) v. 1L Powell £1 Is, costs 8s; C. M. Eoss Co, Ltd. (Mr. Lauronson) v.Huiarangi Kerekeha £1 12s 4d, costs 13s; A. Oooksley (Mr. Hutchison) v. Mrs. A Larmonth £1 costs only. Judgment Summonses.

A. S. Hagley (Levin) was ordered to pay the Bush Horowhenua Herd-Test-ing Association (Mr, Laurenson) the sum of £5 3s. 6d forthwith, in default 7 days’ imprisonment. H. Mitchell, (Palmerston North) was ordered to pay the Para Rubber Co. Ltd. (Mr. Grant). £6 3s : with costs, 18s 6d, in default 7 days ’ imprisonment. Z. A. Morton (Palmerston North) was ordered to pay the Eeliance Printery Go. the sum of £6 14s, in default 7 days’ imprisonment. Adams Ltd. v. Bickers. His Worship delivered reserved judgment in the case wherein Adams Ltd. (Mr. Cooper) proceeded agqinst E. W. Bickers, of Fcilding,. for tho sum of £75 as the amount allegedly due on tho sale of a second-hand car.

“In my opinion,” said tho Magistrate, “the evidence does not disclose a concluded contract and judgment must therefore be for the defendant. I am satisfied the post-dated cheque was given conditional upon the terms of tho sale being agreed upon later. Tho evidence discloses that those terms were never settled and the sale never concluded.”