SUPREME COURT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6309, 6 August 1888, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

Civil Sittings. THIS DAY. (Before His Honor Mr Justice Ward.) PEARSON V. THE QUEEN. Mr Spackman for plaintiff; Mr Joynt for defendant. On the application of Mr Spackman, the hearing of this case was fixed for Wednesdayj Mr Joynt not opposing. (Before Hi 3 Honor and a jury of four.) BENJAMIN JEFFREY V. EDMOND JEFFREY. Mr Stringer for plaintiff ; Mr Byrne for defendant. The plaintiff was a carpenter residing at Addington, and the son of the defendant, who also resided at Addington, and followed the same occupation. The plaintiff's statement of claim set forth that in May, 1881, it was agreed between plaintiff and defendant that the defendant should purchase two sections of land at Addington, and that plaintiff was to pay to defendant the sum of £75, and thereupon become possessed of one of the sections. Plaintiff paid at various times to the defendant moneys amounting to .£75, and on hiß marriage occupied one of the sections — No. 19— of which defendant refused to give him legal possession, and on which he (plaintiff) built a house. The plaintiff prayed — (1) That the defendant mightbe ordered to execute a conveyance of the said section to him. (2) That tho defendant might pay all costs. (3.) That the Court might award such further relief as might be thought fit. An amended statement of claim set forth that, out of natural love and affection, the defendant had given the section No. 19 to the plaintiff as a gift. The defence denied the allegations of the statement of claim, and stated that the defendant had built the house on the section, and that the plaintiff had occupied the section as a tenant of defendant. As a defence to the amended statement of claim, j defendant pleaded the statute of frauds. Mr Stringer called Benjamin Jeffrey, the plaintiff, who deposed that he lived with the defendant, his father, until three years ago. He then went to the North Island, returned, and j lived again with his parents till he was married on March 17, 1888. In 1881, defendant Bpoke about purchasing two sections of land, saying that if plaintiff would pay the price of one, he (plaintiff) was to have it when he wanted it. Plaintiff agreed, and it was decided that he should have Section 10. About a year afterwards it was agreed that plaintiff should give all his earnings to his mother. Plaintiff did so for about thrse yeaTs, until he went to the North Island. He had then paid about £10. Plaintiff received money back to get clothes with. While in the North Island ho sent about £10 to his mother. Afterwards defendant agreed to get timber to build a house on the section. Plaintiff was to pay him for it by rent. The house waa built, defendant working at it in the daytime and plaintiff in tho evening. Plaintiff paid for the papering, some fittings, and an artesian well. Paid defendant .£2O on account of timber on Dec. 23 last. A stable, cow shed, and pigstye belonging to plaintiff's brother-in-law were on the section before the houee was built. They were removed on plaintiff's application. Defendant refused to give notice for them to be removed. After plaintiff's marriage plaintiff asked defendant if lie would give up possession of the deeds ou plaintiff's paying what he owed him. Defendant refused, and plaintiff then said that he would not pay defendant another sixpence. Afterwards found a letter put under tho door, signed by defendant, ordering him to leave, and stating that when defendant's will was read plaintiff would see who would have the land. Defendant afterwards tied up the gate of the section with fencing wire and pulled down the fence. Offered to refer the matter to arbitration. Cross-examined: Was under age when the agreement was made about purchasing the sections. Did not, at any time, pay his father any money for the land. The witness was further cross-examined at great langth. Re-examined : Paid his mother the money for the land by his father's direction. Thomas Partridge deposed that he had a small shed on Section 19, which he removed on receiving notice from plaintiff. Defendant told witness he had given his son the section to make any improvements he thought fit. Mrs Emma Newnham deposed that she waa the plaintiff's mother-in-law. Defendant told her that he had sold plaintiff the section on which the house had been put up.