SUPREME COURT.—CIRCUIT SITTINGS.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 5550, 11 January 1879, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.—CIRCUIT SITTINGS.

Fbidat, 10th January. (Before the Chief Justice and a Common Jury

of Twelve.) HOUGHTON V. Moody.

This was an action between Mary Ann Houghton," by John Houghton, her husband and next friend, and James Harris, plaintiffs, and Charles Meody and John Compton, defendants. . , ~ Mr. Travers for plaintiffs, and Mr. Ollivier for John Compton, under tenant of the defendant, Moody. Ifc wm ftn ejectment suit, brought on au alleged breach of a covenant in a lease of town section No. 507 granted to Charles Moody in 1875 for a term of twenty.one years, at a yearly rental of £IOO. The deed contained a covenant that the lessee should erect buildings to the value of £4OO, and insure in the names of bloody and Houghton to the amount of £4OO, and that if default was made in this respect the lessors might re-enter, and the term of the lease should be at an l end. Plaintiff alleges that the covenant to insure, as provided by the lease, has been broken by the property not being insured in the names of Moodr and Houghton. Moody, the original lessecin 1876, under-let to Mr. John Compton, Wellington, merchant, who defends the action. The defence sets out that the buildings were insured in the National Insurance office in November, 1876, but that through mistake the policy was issued in the name of John Compton and the plaintiff, Houghton, but was shortly afterwards by mutual consent of all parties rectified by the insertion of the namo of Moody in place of Compton, The plaintiff denies this to be the fact. James Mackenzie Miller, clerk in the National Insurance office, was called by Mr. Travers, and deposed that the policy was originally issued in the names of Compton and Houghton ; that it was in the early part of 1877, at the instance of Mr, l and Mrs. Houghton, altered by the insertion of the name of Moody in place of Compton. John Houghton, late storekeeper, Wellington, was next called, and deposed that he had ascertained from Compton in the beginning of January, 1878, that the policy stood in the names of Compton and Houghton ; and went t* the Insurance office to see in whose names the policy stood, and was told that it was in the names of Compton and Houghton ; that a month or two after ho had gone to Compton’s and had seen the policy, and found it was altered and that he then went to the insurance office and was told that it had not been altered on the books. At this stage Mr. Travers said he would accept a nonsuit. As this was the last case to be tried by a common jury, the whole of the jurymen were discharged from further attendance, and tho Court adjourned to Monday next, at 10 a.m., when the case of O'Neil v. Brown will be tried by a Special Jury.