Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DISPUTE OVER PROPERTY.

MISREPRESENTATION DENIED

? CASE FOR THE DEFENDANT.

The case in which Allan Thomas Ariell, .i farmer (Mr. Hall Skelton), claimed £685 :i%u. damages' from Simon Newport Clark, farmer (Mr. Blomfield), was continued in . 1; the Supreme Court yesterday before Mr. Justice Alpers. Plaintiff alleged misrevj . presentations concerning farms at Puketi • 'll, and • Qhaeawai. A counter-claim for £428 - ~•/< was entered by defendant for damages ,1", alleged to have been caused through -I,* plaintiff's occupancy. Mr.' Blomfield moved f<Sr. a non-suit on the ground that according to the evidence plaintiff had elected to adopt the . , contract, and he continued in actual ! rj., possession of the property until Novem,ber. Further, if there was misr'epresen- .. tation, it was innocent. These non-suit points were reserved. Counsel then called evidence to show

there had been no fraud and no mis- • representation. " I Defendant gave evidence of the inspection which plaintiff made of the property and the conversation which occurred on ( that occasion. He also gave evidence in support of his counter-claim, regarding ... the damage done to the property by plaintiff. The case will be continued this morning' '

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19250917.2.138

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 19125, 17 September 1925, Page 13

Word Count
183

DISPUTE OVER PROPERTY. New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 19125, 17 September 1925, Page 13

DISPUTE OVER PROPERTY. New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 19125, 17 September 1925, Page 13