OCCUPANCY OF HOUSES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVI, Issue 17327, 26 November 1919, Page 7

OCCUPANCY OF HOUSES.

SUITS FOR POSSESSION. POWERS OF A MAGISTRATE. Two defended actions concerning rent or possession of city tenements were heard in the Magistrate's Court yesterday. One or two cases of the same nature were settled by consent. The first was that in which John Henry Hannan, retired business man, sought payment of £8 rent and the possession of a house owned by him and occupied by John Pates (Mr. Sullivan), waterside worker, of 22, Hayden Street. The plaintiff in evidence said he had been serving ' notices to quit " on the defendant since July, but, in reply to the magistrate, Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., he admitted that he had continued to accept rent and thereby invalidate his notices. The magistrate also found that the final notice was undated. The plaintiff said the defendant's family smashed the doors and windows of his house and ruined the wallpaper in almost every room. lie des.red possession so that ho could protect his property and renovate the house.

Counsel for defendant contested the order for possession under the War Legislation Act, which protected any tenant from ejection so long as he paid the rent. "I can evict a tenant on any grounds I think fit," said Mr. Hunt. Without calling on the defence, however, he gave judgment for the plaintiff for the amount of rent already paid into court, and advised the plaintiff to serve a legal notice to quit before he took any further action for possession. " I have lost enough under that Act already," said the plaintiff as he left, the box.

" So have a great many other householders," rejoined Mr. Hunt. The second case was a claim for £3 Is 3d, allegedly due for rent, made by George Littlejolm (Mr. McLiver) against Patrick O'Shea (Mr. Durham), and heard before Mr. J. W. Poynton, S.M. Tho defendant counter-claimed for £30 damages on the ground that Littlejohn had gained possession from him by misrepresentation.

The magistrate decided for the* plaintiff, gave judgment for the amount of the claim, and disallowed the counterclaim.

Judgment was given by Mr. E. C. Cutten, S.M., in the case in which Ann Harris (Mr. Mahoney) sought tho possession of a tenement in King Street, Archhill, occupied by Theresa Bella Morrison (Mr. Waddingham). The plaintiff sold the house to a returned soldier, who desired the house for his own occupation, and the transfer had been completed. The tenant was also given notice to quit. The tenant, in defence, submitted that she was tho dependant of a returned soldier.

The magistrate said the Act gave him power to leave the defendant m occupation if he thought the making of an order would entail undue hardship. But in this, case the tenant admitted she was looking for a larger house, and had refused the former owner's offer to sell her the house she occupied. Consequently she must have known the house was going to be sold, and she could not complain if the Court gave an order for possession within one month, for the benefit of a returned soldier. The order was made accordingly.