MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Waipa Post, Volume XII, Issue 663, 27 July 1917, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

THURSDAY, JULY 2(ith, J!)I7.

Before Mr E. Rawson, S.M. A claim was brought by C. M. Dowd for the recovery of £39 15s from C. Y. Dally, this amount being money, agreed to be paid op an indemnity. Mr Taylor, representing Jackson, Russell Tonks and Ostler appeared for flic plaintiff, tlie defendant being represented by Mr G. P. Finlay. C. M. Dowd farmer of Waiuku, and formerly of Oparau said in January 1914 lie transferred a native lease to the defendant, the price agreed on by the parties having been £250. There were two other interests in the property and lie explained the nature of these encumbrances and the conditions by which the property could be frceholdcd. These matters were discussed at the time the transfer of tlie lease was arranged, and defendant had proposed to interview the other parties and seek to arrange to buy their interests as well. About a month later defendant suggested an exchange of properties. The next development was a request by defendant for information as to when the interest on mortgages was payable, and an agreement was entered into between the parties. Counsel for the defence denied that an agreement had ever come into his possession. He objected to an alleged copy being admitted as evidence and stated that all efforts lo trace tlie original documents had failed. After an adjournment in which counsel made enquiries relating to the missing documents, witness went on to traverse the history of the negotiations for the transfer of this very complicated lease. He had paid £45 5s as interest on morgages since the agreement was entered into with Dally and had received a claim for a further £8 12s fid.

T. B. Anderson of Oparau said be had agreed to sell to Dally bis interest in the lease for £IOO, but on consideration thought a bigger price should be paid and refused to sign tlie transfer.

The position was that if the freehold was acquired witnesss was to receive £250, but until tlie lessee purchased tlie freehold lie was to receive interest.

Under cross examination he said he knew a man named Davis had purchased tlie freehold.soon after Dally went into possession but lie did not think this defeated his right to the interest although his agreement was that tlie lessee and not an outsider was to buy tlie land from the natives According to his valuation defendant had paid the plaintiff £2.35 for nothing as the property was not worth that sum together with the existing liabilities. After hearing tlie arguments of counsel, the magistrate non-suited the plaintiff on tlie grounds that the purchase of the freehold by Davies had voided any agreement for the payment of principal or interest between these parties. Costs amounting to £ll 8s were allowed.