SUBURBAN SHOP SALE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 18949, 21 February 1925, Page 10

SUBURBAN SHOP SALE.

SUPREME COURT ACTION. MISREPRESENTATION ALLEGEDTHE QUESTION OF TAKINGS. Am action •which was tried toward the end of last year in the Auckland Magistrate's Court and resulted in a non-suit, came before Mr. Justice Reed in the Supreme Court yesterday. Margaret H. Warth (Mr. Dickson), wife of George Warth, sugar works employee, sued Charles J. dc Luea (Mr. Leary), for £250 special damages in connection with the sale by defendant to plaintiff of a business at Mount Albert, known as the Kosie Confectionery, for £375. It was alleged by plaintiff that defendant had misrepresented the turnover of the business, the amount of profits, and value of the stock and certain accessories. For the defence it was contended the statements made by defendant were true. Mr. Dickson said it was a case of alleged misrepresentation on the ground of fraud. Plaintiff had paid £125 cash, giving promissory notes for the balance. Plaintiff stated in evidence that De Luca said the business amounted to £22 to £3o a week, and that t here was a clear weekly profit of £6. He also said the stock' and fittings cost him £250 and that there was about £IOO worth of stock. Plaintiff found there was not more than £4O worth of stock. On taking possession, she discovered the takings averaged only £l4 or £ls a week, the maximum being £lB. In cross-examination plaintiff said she sold the business to the landlord for £125. Mr. Deary, opening for the defence, said such representations as had been made were undoubtedly true and could be i)roved by the books. Defendant stated he told plaintiff the takings were from £22 to £3O. In Christmas week he took £37. lie told Mrs Warth he was making £4 10s a week, and that if she ran the shop without an assistant she could clear £6 a wek. His takings averaged £23 17s Id for 60 weeks. The case was adjourned until to-day.