SUPREME COURT ACTION

Southland Times, Issue 24756, 29 May 1942, Page 6

SUPREME COURT ACTION

RESCISSION OF CONTRACT SOUGHT

The hearing was continued in the Supreme Court yesterday before his Honour Mr Justice Kennedy of an action for the recovery of a deposit of £2OOO paid under a written contract for the sale and purchase of land in Dee street. The parties are Southland Investments, Limited (Mr F. S. Wilding and Mr N. L. Watson), the plaintiff, and the Public Trustee (Mr H. J. Macalister), the defendant. When the hearing was resumed yesterday evidence on behalf of the defendant was taken.

The recess—the piece of land in dispute—was not at any time occupied by L. B. Millers, Limited, or the §elf-Help Cooperative, Limited, or was it tenanted by either, said Ronald Bird, a member of the staff of the Public Trust Department. The Public Trustee did not at any time intend to sell the piece of land after the sale of the Regent Theatre; nor did the Public Trustee knowingly authorize anyone to sell it subsequent to the sale. To Mr Wilding: The plan and contract were approved by the Wellington office and sent to Invercargill for execution. At that time the Invercargill office did not know of any inaccuracy in the contract. The plan was misleading and the error was discovered by the office in 1941, but no attempt had been made to adjust the matter. Proctor Henry Nicholson, land valuer, said he placed the value of the land at £5O. He based his valuation on the frontage value of £l5O a foot. He valued the Federal Buildings in 1938 at £8250, and in his opinion that property would maintain its value if it were tenanted today. John T. Carswell, real estate agent and valuer, said the maximum value of the land in his opinion was £5O. He set the value of a one-story building on that piece of land—it was only 10ft by sft Bin—at £6O. Arthur Francis Stacey, of Christchurch, who acted as agent for the beneficiaries in the Ward estate, gave details of the disposal of freehold properties in Invercargill, including the Regent Theatre and Federal Buildings in Dee street. Expert evidence on building and the costs of alterations to the premises on the land in dispute was given by Lachlan Gray, a building contractor, and Edward H. Smith, a registered architect. . Mr Macalister submitted on behalf of the defendant that there was no mistake In the inspection by the plaintiff of the property and its boundaries, but there was a mistake in the .plan and that mistake had been seized upon by the plaintiff to get out of his contract. The hearing of the action will be resumed this morning.