INTERESTING TO LAND SPECULATORS.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12202, 21 April 1909, Page 2

INTERESTING TO LAND SPECULATORS.

Mr W. Kerr, S.M., this morning gave his reserved judgment in the case of E. Bergman (tailor) v. P. Wolfson (uphol-sterer),-a claim for the recovery of £17 i paid to the defendant by way of deposit I und instalments on a section of land. Plaintiff alleged that in December Jasthe agreed verbally with 4 defendant to. purchase two" sections at Aramoho, in the Walker estate, for £100, the purchase money «:,toi .be paid ~as follows:—. £\0 deposit Jjhd balance itt instalments* :«fet6Qßii>g with interest* .at' 5' per rent. The plaintiff, in accordance with the verbal agreement, paid the deposit and instalments totalling £7. till about the Ist March, when defendant refused to complete the agreement of sale. In evidence at th« hearing plaintiff said he was willing to go hawking in December, and on returning in February decided not to j# on hawking, and therefore fixed #ie price of the section at £161. The payments were stopped by plaintiff iv February because defendant stated in [ evidence that he paid £61 and £62 cash respectively for ths sections, also £1 12s for clearing gorse, and £4 13s for conveyancing. Plaintiff approached witness to sell the land ; which was increasing in value, and which he had advertised for sale at £80 and £85 respectively. He agreed to sell to plaintiff at £78 and £83, and drew up an agreement and copy, one signed by both parties, and stamped with a shilling stamp. The copy of the agreement produced in Court he declared to be a true copy, and stated that plaintiff signed it when he paid the £10 deposit, i Defendant stated that he met plaintiff in the street in February, when the latter asked to be refunded £10 of the ( £17 payments made, as he did not want the land. Defendant replied that the land had gone down in value, and would not agree to plaintiff's proposal to drop the purchase. Agreed to refund £8 if Bergman would 'cry off," but he refused this amount. He could not show a single instance in which land in the estate was sold at an increased value in December. His Worship considered the copy of the alleged agreement produced could not be accepted, while plaintiff denied that it ever existed. The defendant's evidence was very unsatisfactory, and the copy could not be considered in value in December. Defendant had offered the sections for sale at £40 more than they actually cost him. In so advertising the sections, the defendant's conduct, under the circumstances, his Worship considered to be unscrupulous. He considered that no direct agreement was really forthcoming, and quoted cases to show that where there was no contract, or no contract which could be enforced, the purchaser was entitled to have the deposit returned. Judgment was therefore given for plaintiff for the return of the £17.