LEASE OF LAND AND STOCK

Southland Times, Issue 23991, 5 December 1939, Page 3

LEASE OF LAND AND STOCK

CLAIM BY RETIRED FARMER COURT HEARING OCCUPIES EIGHT HOURS A claim involving the lease of land and stock was heard in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday when. Alfred Edwin Tapper, of Grassmere, a retired farmer, sought the sum of £257/4/- from Edward Harry Tyrrell and Mabel Bernice Tyrrell, of West Plains, and Henry Maxwell Tyrrell, of Christchurch. The hearing was a long one and occupied about eight hours, the Court adjourning at 10.30 p.m. Mr R. C. Abernethy, S.M., was on the bench. The plaintiff was represented by Mr M. M. Macdonald and the defendants by Mr F. G. O’Beirne. The statement of claim said that about August 1935, the plaintiff agreed to lease to the defendants Edward Harry Tyrrell and Mabel Bernice . Tyrrell part of his property comprising 65 acres situated at Grassmere, together with the stock of the plaintiff—one bull and 34 cows—at an annual rental of £l5O, payable quarterly. These two defendants vacated the premises about June 2, 1939, at which date rent had been paid up to February 28, 1939. It was expressed or implied in the agreement that stock of equal value, on a basis of £5 a head werp to be returned to the plaintiff at the end of the lease. The two defendants accounted to the plaintiff for one bull and two cows, but 32 cows remained unaccounted for. Contrary to the agreement, the defendants failed to keep the ditches and fences in proper order and failed to keep the premises clear of gorse, the plaintiff suffering damage as a result. The plaintiff claimed to recover from the two defendants the sum of £257/4/made up from the use and occupation of the premises, the value of 32 cows and a number of tools, cost of repairs to ditches, re-erection of fences, cost of cutting gorse, one-half the cost of repairs to and overhaul of electric pump, and general damages. The statement of claim added that the two defendants alleged that the agreement was made by the plaintiff with the defendant, Henry Maxwell Tyrrell. The plaintiff claimed, in the alternative, to recover from Henry Tyrrell and against the property of Mrs M. B. Tyrrell, the sum of £257/4/-. LAND IN FINE ORDER Alfred Tapper stated in evidence that when the defendants went on to the property the land was in good order. However, it was in disgraceful condition when they left. Fences were down — in fact the property was practically one large paddock—and the ditches were badly blocked. George Herbert Pont, of Tuatapere said he saw the property .when the Tyrrells took possession. At that time he considered the property to be in a very bad state. The wire was off many of the fences, posts were .broken and the ditches were in a bad state of repair. He and another man were employed at one stage to clear some noxious weeds. It was necessary to use heavy axes to cut the broom, some of which, he considered, had not been attended to for seven or eight years. The fences were certainly not sheep proof. After dealing with legal points, Mr O’Beirne claimed that Henry Tyrrel’ was the real tenant of the property and not the other two defendants. Edward Harry Tyrrell stated that h< was present when negotiations wen taking place, but little was discusser apart from the rent and the purchase price. He did not take much interest as his son Henry was the intending tenant. Cross-examined by Mr Macdonald the witness said that when they wen’ on to the property Mrs Tyrrell had only four cows and a few young beasts When she left the property she had about 20 dairy cows. She held a clearing sale recently and this realized i substantial sum. The Magistrate reserved his decision