SUPREME COURT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16508, 19 August 1921, Page 8

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTINGS. TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS. The civil sittings of the Supreme Court were continued before his Honor Air Justice Herdman to-day. CLAIM FOR POSSESSION OF A HOUSE. John Alexander Pringle. Philp, 11, Mansfield Avenue, Christchurch, sales manager, sued Eva May Tomkies, wife of Arthur Tomkies, Christchurch, for the possession of land and premises at 148, Rolleston Street, Limvood, and profits from April 23 last at the rate of £2 lUs a week. Defendant refused to give up possession, and claimed that she had bought tho property for £IO3O, and was willing to complete the purchase. Mr I?. Twyneham appealed for plaintiff and Mr F. Whiteombe for defendant. Mr Twyneham said that defendant was in the premises by an arrangement with the previous tenant and without plaintiff's authority, and refused to leave. When the contract to sell to plaintiff was made no date was on it for taking possession. Somebody, without authority, put in the date of possession after the signing of the contract. Plaintiff said that Mr F. H. Labatt arranged for the sale of the property to defendant . The* deal was completed in March last. The arrangement was for £SO deposit and £l5O on date of possession. The date of possession, April fi. 1921, now in the contract, was not in it when he signed. Defendant paid the £SO and took possession of the premises without his knowledge. The sum of £l5O, which was to be paid on possession. bad not been paid. To Mr Whiteombe: Mr Labatt was acting as his agent in all the arrangements. He did not know defendant, and only knew from hearsay that she had entered into possession. Mr Labatt was not authorised to give defendant possession, or to alter the contract between witness and defendant. Defendant «oid that it was left to her to get the tenant out of the house. The date of possession was in the contract when she signed it. She did not pay the £l5O because she was waiting to get tho money through the Public '1 trustee, from a deceased estate in Wellington. Mr J. Goodman, who was making some of the arrangements, told her that be could pay tho money on her account at any time. He also told her that ho had obtained the £l5O, but she could not say whether he had obtained it from the Public Trustee or from Mr O’Regan, a Wellington lawyer acting in the case. Frederick Hubert Labatt, accountant and land agent, said that the contract was typed bv a typist in his office. Ihe date of possession was discussed with defendant, and April 6, 1921 was put in tho contract after defendant signed, but before plaintiff signed. His Honor: Was April 6 inserted at your instigation only, and without tho authority, knowledge or consent of defendant t —lt was with defendant’s consent. It was inserted a few days after she signed. His Honor said that defendant had paid* £SO deposit, and said that her ! agent, Mr Goodman, was ready to pay the £l5O provided for in the contract. Il she paid it, the case was at an end as che next payment was not duo for some time. His Honor said that he had come to the conclusion that April 6, 1921 was inserted after the contract ’ was made, without plaintiff’s authority. It was in the original, but not in the carbon duplicate. As defendant had not paid the £l5O provided for, she was in possession unlawfully and was a trespasser, as she had been given notice to leave. He would make an order for defendant to give possession to plaintiff on or before August 23 next. Defendant would be ordered to pay £2O, profits from April AS to August 23. Plaintiff was allowed costs on the lowest scale. UNDEFENDED DIVORCE CASES. His Honor heard undefended cases in divorce. Hiu Honor mace decrees nisL to be made absolute in three months in the following cases:—Elisabeth Merfield (Mr O. T. J. Alrvers) v Sydney John Merfield, cruelty and drunkenness; Eliz/abeth Ann Barkwith (Mr A. J. Donnelly) v. William George Barkwith. desertion; Cora Lydia Edwards (Mr Donnelly) v. James Thomas George j Edwards, failure to maintain.