317
but merely to give a piece of ground purchased by your Petitioner to the Magistrates who had neither purchased nor paid for it) had marked out by pegs the boundary line laid down by him in 1884, and confirmed by him in 1880 such piece including an area of 34,000 Square Feet included in your Petitioner's Lease and which he was up to that line in possession of as before mentioned.
18. "Your Petitioner being aggrieved by the said Order of the 7th of September 1885, and by the proceedings thereunder (inasmuch as your Petitioner felt that the said Order and proceedings were irregular upon the grounds that the Acting Registrar's Report was such that it could not be confirmed as against your Petitioner and that the said Order and proceedings were not justified by or properly consequent on the said Order of the 6th of March 1885) gave notice of Motion before the full Court that the said Order of the 7th of September 1885 confirming the Registrar's Report dated the 15th of May 1885, should be set aside and that an enquiry should be directed as to the Boundary line really indicated by the Sale Map of 1884 referred to in the Canby's Plan of 1880, being the Plan and Confirmation by Mr Canby of the
19. The said Motion was heard before Sir George Phillippo Chief Justice and the Honorable Mr. Ackroyd Acting Puisne Judge sitting as the full Court on the 26th day of November 1885, and dismissed with costs upon the grounds that the case had already been decided and that upon the issues raised in the suit it was not necessary to decide the case upon measurements.
20. After the ground had been taken away from your Petitioner by the Bailiff of the Supreme Court as before mentioned your Petitioner having then already spent a large sum of money upon the Land in building Godowns forced he was so much damaged, and was incurring great losses by reason of the eastern portion remaining unfinished that your Petitioner completed the Buildings within the new line at an extra expense for alteration of Plans and materials for building, which had been prepared for building on the larger area included in your Petitioner's Crown Lease and as purchased by your Petitioner.
21. Your Petitioner then in accordance with the regulations for appeal to Her Majesty in Her Privy Council duly completed the security to be given by him as Appellant on such Appeal and on the 20th day of December 1885, presented his Petition to His Honor the Chief Justice for leave to Appeal to Her Majesty in Her Privy Council.
22. The said Petition was heard on the 11th day of February 1886 before His Honor the Chief Justice and Mr Justice Russell Puisne Judge who ordered that your Petitioner's application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs on the ground that your Petitioner had no right of appeal in respect of the Title to Land under the value of £500.
23. Your Petitioner thereupon caused a Petition to be presented to Her Majesty in Her