CLAIM FOR RENT

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIII, Issue 10063, 30 August 1918, Page 5

CLAIM FOR RENT

A LANDLORD. NONSUITED,

Mr W. G. Riddell, S.M., heard a civil action yesterday in which Robert Hannah, boot manufacturer, of Wellington, proceeded against Madam Tutschka to recover the sum of £2B alleged to.be due for rent. The. plaintiff,. for whom Mr A. W. Blair appeared, said ■ that the defendant occupied premises owned by him at 91a, Cuba street, and carried on the business of a dressmaker. Tho rent paid was at the rate of £1 per week, for the use of seven or eight rooms. The premises were old and, it was not plaintiff’s intention to do anything to them until after the war, when a new building was to be erected. The defendant, however, prevailed upon witness to make certain alterations, the estimated cost of which was £6O. Being desirous of meeting tho defendant the work was carried ont, the defendant agreeing to an increase of rent from £1 to £1 10s per week from, tho completion of the' alterations. Payments at. the increased'rental had been paid and the claim was for the balance due. In answer to counsel plaintiff denied that the repairs and alterations were effected on account of the Health Department having ordered tho building to be renovated.

The defendant, who was represented by Mr H. F. O’Leary, flho entered into possession of tho premises on March 27th. 1916. She carried on the business of a dressmaker and had boarders. The- rooms were registered as a factory, but a license had not been taken out this vear as the lisi spector of Factories said there was no necessity on account of defendant not employing assistants. Complaints had been made regarding the condition of the roof of the building, and a doctor who was called in expressed tho opinion that the place was not fit for a dog to live in. Defendant told plaintiff that if repairs were effected she would try and ,pay £1 XOs per week. She did so for several weeks, but was unable to continue tho payments, but £1 per week had been paid to date. Mr Blair pointed out that the land was worth £250 per foot, and if 8 per cent, on capital value was demanded, tho rent would be in the vicinity of £5 per week for tho portion occupied by the defendant. , After hearing argument by Mr O’Learv for the defence, the magistrate said that tbo plaintiff must bo nonsuited on the ground that tho premises were a dwelling-house within "Tho meaning of the War Legislation Act, and.there was .no evidence before tho court to show whether tbo increase of rent to £1 19s was justified or not. No costs were allowed.