CLAIM BY FRUITERER

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22108, 14 May 1935, Page 12

CLAIM BY FRUITERER

RECENT LITIGATION SEQUEL COURT ENTERS NONSUIT [by telegraph—OWN correspondent] TE KUITI, Monday A claim against the Te Kuiti Court bailiff, George James Paine, for alleged wrongful distraint and trespass, was brought in the Te Kuiti Magistrate's Court to-day by Ngan Keng Joe, fruiterer. The case was a sequel to an involved action previously heard in which Ngan Keng Joe secured the return of certain chattels and goods seized on behalf of A. Pople and Son, fruit merchants, of Auckland, who claimed that a transfer of the business from Hope C'hong to Keng Joe on December 17 was a camouflage to prevent the execution of the warrant. To-day's case was a claim for £64 5s 3d for loss of credit and general damages caused by the alleged wrongful distraint. Mr. A. Paterson appeared for plaintiff and Mr. A. G. Quartley for defendant. Plaintiff produced evidence to show that he had suffered loss in his business as a result of the carrying out of the distraint. Under cross-examination, he admitted that he had received from his brother, Hope Chong, monoy in excess of his wages of £6. Mr. Quartley applied for a nonsuit on the grounds that tho requisite notice under section 194 of the Magistrate's Court Act, 1928, had not been proved. The section, which was designed' for the protection of Court officials, stated that before an action was commenced against a Court official for anything done in his official capacity, one month's notice in writing of tho cause of action should be given to tho defendant, and tho action must be commenced within three months of the cause arising. A nonsuit was granted, with costs.