POSSESSION OF HOUSE

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 55, Issue 3989, 10 December 1937, Page 5

POSSESSION OF HOUSE

“INIQUITOUS STATE OF AFFAIRS.” APPLICATION TO COURT FAILS. At the local sitting of the Magistrate’s Court a month ago application was made by three spinsters, L. A. Garvey, H. E. Garvey and G. B. Garvey (Mr S. Preston) for possession of a house occupied by Harold William Flutey (Mr J. A. Hawkins), which they had purchased to demolish to make room for four flats. It was stated then that the tenant had already had two months’ notice to quit, but the tenant had not complied, alleging that it was impossible to find other accommodation for his wife and children. The case was adjourned for a month.

The case was again mentioned in Court on Thursday, when Mr F. H. Levien was to give his reserved judgment. He said that he had not yet been supplied with the latest statute bearing on tenancy, and therefore he did not k-now the effect of legislation. If he made an order now it may be that it would be contrary to the statutes. He proposed to follow the lead of other magistrates in similar cases, and adjourn the case for the present. The statute may provide for a certain course in respect to Court proceedings already filed oi pending. Mr Preston asked if Flutey would give an undertaking to evacuate the premises within a month from date. That meant that he had had three three months in which to find another home.

Mr Hawkins protested that his client could not do this, nor should he be required to. The obligation at present is on the owner to find a home for the tenant if he wants possession.

Mr Preston commented that it was “a peculiar state of affairs.’ An inspector is going round the borough making a housing survey, at the insistence of the Government; he is required to ask all sorts of questions — even the age of one’s wife or sweetheart —yet an owner was denied possession of a house purchased. His clients, three young ladies in business who desire to erect additional accommodation to relieve the house shortage, are denied the opportunity. It seemed to him that the effect of the legislation was to provide employment for an army of inspectors—some to condemn houses, others to carry out certain other functions; but .none to actually benefit the community by providing homes. It seemed to him a farcical position. His Worship said he could not help the applicants in the present case. They knew, or were supposed to know, before buying that there was legislation affecting their plans. It was a difficult case, but only one of many such cases. Mr Preston: It reveals the iniquitous state of the law, sir, though 1 admit you are only doing your duty in administering it. Mr Hawkins told the Court that Flutey had not relaxed in his endeavour to find another home, but he had failed.

His Worship expressed the hope that Flutey would not be too fastidious in his choice of a new home, if offered one. But at present no order would be made against him.