{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman{\*\falt Times New Roman};} {\f183\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f184\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f186\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek{\*\falt Times New Roman};} {\f187\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f188\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f189\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic){\*\falt Times New Roman};} {\f190\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f191\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese){\*\falt Times New Roman};}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255; \red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0; \red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 \styrsid1002006 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\s15\ql \li0\ri0\sa120\sl480\slmult1 \widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 \sbasedon0 \snext15 \styrsid1002006 Body Text 2;}{\s16\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar \tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 \styrsid1002006 header;}{\*\cs17 \additive \sbasedon10 \styrsid1002006 page number;}{ \s18\qj \li0\ri0\sl600\slmult1\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs16\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext18 \styrsid1002006 FR2;}{\*\ts19\tsrowd\trbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrr \brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrh\brdrs\brdrw10 \trbrdrv\brdrs\brdrw10 \trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \sbasedon11 \snext19 \styrsid2828838 Table Grid;}}{\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid599345 \rsid672543\rsid811014\rsid862776\rsid933470\rsid983853\rsid1002006\rsid1009808\rsid1334451\rsid1598413\rsid1972231\rsid2193419\rsid2309175\rsid2371452\rsid2504626\rsid2506087\rsid2781184\rsid2821402\rsid2828838\rsid2956341\rsid2972013\rsid3176464 \rsid3422714\rsid3810279\rsid3822112\rsid3831056\rsid4149855\rsid4160285\rsid4329331\rsid4331392\rsid4529449\rsid4664122\rsid4671164\rsid4744076\rsid4815830\rsid4855016\rsid4931203\rsid5052173\rsid5062183\rsid5117400\rsid5123780\rsid5395881\rsid5466213 \rsid5592493\rsid5643559\rsid6060947\rsid6160848\rsid6317405\rsid6514138\rsid6782860\rsid6891610\rsid6953338\rsid7021742\rsid7366506\rsid7405946\rsid7483118\rsid7818236\rsid7958375\rsid8016262\rsid8083724\rsid8128192\rsid8270074\rsid8421204\rsid8456977 \rsid8459253\rsid8524331\rsid8598875\rsid8790013\rsid8866877\rsid8945115\rsid9189166\rsid9270374\rsid9334887\rsid9452663\rsid9455426\rsid9569393\rsid9599955\rsid9776131\rsid10355983\rsid10422433\rsid10712439\rsid10749241\rsid11014019\rsid11292607 \rsid11355540\rsid11404427\rsid11814660\rsid11880640\rsid11928628\rsid12015529\rsid12063525\rsid12081942\rsid12211158\rsid12921552\rsid12931985\rsid12983114\rsid13111834\rsid13198352\rsid13252134\rsid13500707\rsid13654509\rsid13976731\rsid14055906 \rsid14105686\rsid14108652\rsid14309081\rsid14496123\rsid14510136\rsid14695321\rsid14967201\rsid15032169\rsid15159555\rsid15297671\rsid15405516\rsid15541791\rsid15560408\rsid15617788\rsid15864576\rsid15871169\rsid15945946\rsid16592213\rsid16597937 \rsid16660507\rsid16671932}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 11.0.5604;}{\info{\title \'93this is a quote, has said, of me saying \'91this is a quote\'92\'94}{\author raikatalau_l}{\operator raikatalau_l}{\creatim\yr2011\mo6\dy15\hr16\min35} {\revtim\yr2011\mo6\dy15\hr16\min37}{\version5}{\edmins3}{\nofpages9}{\nofwords4515}{\nofchars22712}{\*\company Pacific Legal Information Institue}{\nofcharsws27076}{\vern24689}} \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1440\dgvorigin1008\dghshow1\dgvshow1 \jexpand\viewkind4\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\nobrkwrptbl\snaptogridincell\allowfieldendsel\wrppunct \asianbrkrule\rsidroot1002006\newtblstyruls\nogrowautofit \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid5466213 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid5466213 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid5466213 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid5466213 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \linex0\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \s16\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\brdrb\brdrs\brdrw15\brsp20 \tqc\tx3553\tqr\tx7293\tqr\tx8789\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2972013 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs16\cgrid0\insrsid8421204 \tab }{\fs16\insrsid8421204 Ambika Prasad v Santa Wati & Bisun Deo (CA)}{\insrsid8421204 \tab }{\field{\*\fldinst {\cs17\fs16\insrsid8421204\charrsid933470 PAGE } }{\fldrslt {\cs17\fs16\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid5466213 9}}}{\fs16\insrsid8421204\charrsid933470 \tab }{\cs17\insrsid8421204\charrsid7021742 \par }\pard \s16\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid8421204 \par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}} {\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8 \pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart Ambika_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}AMBIKA PRASAD v SANTA WATI & BISUN DEO \par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 {\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkend Ambika_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati} \par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Court of Appeal Civil Appellate Jurisdiction \par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts19\trgaph108\trleft-108\trftsWidth1\trftsWidthB3\trftsWidthA3\trautofit1\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid2828838\tbllkhdrrows\tbllklastrow\tbllkhdrcols\tbllklastcol \clvertalt \clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth2808\clshdrawnil \cellx2700\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth6048\clshdrawnil \cellx8748\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\pararsid16721929 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 {\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 14, 22 November, 2001\cell }\pard \s15\ql \li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin3600\pararsid2828838 {\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 ABU 0027/99S \cell }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\langfenp3081\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts19\trgaph108\trleft-108\trftsWidth1\trftsWidthB3\trftsWidthA3\trautofit1\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid2828838\tbllkhdrrows\tbllklastrow\tbllkhdrcols\tbllklastcol \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth2808\clshdrawnil \cellx2700\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth6048\clshdrawnil \cellx8748\row }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 {\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 order for possession of land occupied by the Appellant - competency of appeal \endash whether Court can grant orders for possession when disputed issues regarding whether or not the Appellant had an equitable interest and whether or not there was fraud by the Respondents - Court of Appeal Rules r.16; Land Transfer Act ss39, 169 \par }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 The Respondents sought by summons and obtained summary judgment for an order for vacant possession pursuant to s169 of the Land Transfer Act that they were the registered proprietor, when the first named Respondent purchased the land from Kali Charan. The Appellant a ppealed to the Court of Appeal against the making of the order, which appeal was upheld.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 The Court of Appeal held that the issues between the parties, namely whether the Appellant held an equitable interest in the land and whether the Respondents were gui lty of fraud, were inappropriate for summary trial on affidavit evidence. The Court of Appeal set aside the earlier order for possession and remitted the matter for trial in the High Court. Before the trial judge, the parties agreed to treat the affidavit s filed as pleadings. The trial judge found no evidence of fraud or that the Defendant had an interest in the land, and made an order for possession. The trial judge ordered that the Respondents either pay the Appellant the value of the improvements, to be valued by a registered valuer, or the Appellant be permitted to remove any improvements on the land.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 The appellate Court found that the trial judge was wrong in finding no evidence of fraud when the Appellant had deposed to a combination of factors: his p ayment to Kali Charan of $700, the first named Respondent}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s father and predecessor in title, his occupation for 13 years, and the Respondents}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 knowledge of these matters. The appellate court did not disturb the finding of payment. What was left was knowled ge and cultivation of the land, which did not reach the required standard of actual fraud, personal dishonesty or moral turpitude at the heart of s39 Land Transfer Act, on the authorities. The appellate Court found the Appellant had not made out a case of fraud. \par \par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 {\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Held\endash }{ \lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 (1)}{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 The}{ \b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Respondents}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 knowledge of the Appellant}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s occupation and cultivation of the land is not to be regarded as fraudulent of the standard required of actual fraud, personal dishonesty or moral turpitude at the heart of s39 Land Transfer Act, on the authorities; cultivation by the Respondent of the land is not enough to claim an interest to defeat the indefeasibility of the Respondents}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 title as registered proprietor.}{ \lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Merely to take a transfer with notice or even knowledge that its registration will defeat an existing unregistered interest is not fraud.}{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9334887 {\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid9334887 \par }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 (2) Disputed matters regarding whether or not the Appellant had an equitable interest and whether or not there was fraud by the Respondent s are matter are clearly issues which cannot be resolve by affidavit evidence and ought to go to trial.}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 {\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Appeal dismissed with costs. \par }{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par Cases referred to in Judgment}{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid2828838 \par }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Achatz v De Reuver}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 ([1971] SASR 240 \par }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Bahr v Nicolay}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 [No. 2] (1988) 164 CLR 604 \par }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Butler}{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v}{ \b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Fairclough}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 (1917) 23 CLR 78 \par }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Dharam Pal}{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v}{ \b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Suruj Pal}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Civ App 66/74 14 July 1975 \par }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Gajadhar}{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v}{ \b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 ]ai Pal}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 ABU 49/81 21 July 1982 \par }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Oertel v Hordern}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 (1902) 2 SR (NSW) (Eq.) 37 \par }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 R.}{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 M}{ \b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Hosking Properties v Barnes}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 [1971 1 SASR 100 \par }\pard \s15\ql \fi-374\li374\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin374\itap0\pararsid2828838 {\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Waimiha Sawmilling}{ \b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Co.}{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Ltd.}{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v}{ \b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Waione Timber Co. Ltd.}{\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 [1923] NZLR 1137 \par }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Wicks}{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v Bennett; Friedman v Barrett; }{ \b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 Ex parte}{\b\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Friedman}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 [1962] Qd R 498}{\i\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 {\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Raman P. Singh for the Appellant \par Mehboob Raza on instruction from Maqbool & Co. for the Respondents \par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 {\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts19\trgaph108\trleft-108\trftsWidth1\trftsWidthB3\trftsWidthA3\trautofit1\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid9334887\tbllkhdrrows\tbllklastrow\tbllkhdrcols\tbllklastcol \clvertalt \clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth2448\clshdrawnil \cellx2340\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth6408\clshdrawnil \cellx8748\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\pararsid5709501 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid9334887 22 November, 2001 \cell }\pard \ql \li1332\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin1332\pararsid9334887 {\b\caps\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid9334887 judgment}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid9334887 \cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid9334887 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts19\trgaph108\trleft-108\trftsWidth1\trftsWidthB3\trftsWidthA3\trautofit1\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid9334887\tbllkhdrrows\tbllklastrow\tbllkhdrcols\tbllklastcol \clvertalt\clbrdrt \brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth2448\clshdrawnil \cellx2340\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth6408\clshdrawnil \cellx8748 \row }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 {\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Eichelbaum, Sheppard, Tompkins, JJA}{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }{\b\lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 This appeal from a Judgment of the High Court of Fiji (Pathik J.) brought against the making of an order for possession of certain land was instituted by a notice of appeal filed on 8 July 1999. Pathik J}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s order was seal ed on 29 March 1999. Rule 16 of the Court of Appeal Rules provides that notices of appeal from orders other than interlocutory orders must be filed within 6 weeks of the day on which the judgment or order of the court appealed from was signed, entered or otherwise perfected. The notice of appeal was thus filed about 2 months out of time, the time for its filing having expired on 10 May 1999. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9334887 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Prior to the hearing of the appeal, the Respondent s gave notice that they would object to the competency of the appeal. The matter was raised as a preliminary matter when the appeal was called on for hearing. Discussion ensued. The Appellant sought leave to appeal out of time pursuant to the Rules of the Supreme Court as applied to the Court of Appeal. Initially the application was opposed, but, after further discussion, the Respondent s agreed to withdraw their opposition in order to obtain a more expeditious final outcome of the appeal than may have been the case if there had been an adjournment to allow the Appellant t o prepare an application for an extension of time. Accordingly, the court made an order deeming the time for filing the appeal to have been extended to 8 July 1999. The hearing of the appeal then proceeded. \par \par By summons dated 9 December 1992 filed pursuant to {\*\bkmkstart s169_LTA_Ambika_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati_Deo}s.169 {\*\bkmkend s169_LTA_Ambika_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati_Deo}of the Land Transfer Act Cap 131, the Respondents, the Plaintiff s in the action, sought possession of portion of land occupied by the Appellant, the Defendant in the action, known as Matasawalevu on the island of Vanua Levu being Lot 3 on Plan 5800 and being part of the land comprised in Certificate of Title volume 27109. \par \par The Respondents}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 summons had been the subject of an earl ier judgment by the primary Judge which had led to the making of an order for possession of the same land on 28 April 1995. The Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal against the making of the order. The appeal was upheld on 27 February 1998. The Court of Appeal held that the issues between the parties, namely whether the Appellant held an equitable interest in the land and whether the Respondents were guilty of fraud, were inappropriate for summary trial on affidavit evidence. The earlier order for possession was set aside and the Court ordered that the matter be set down for trial in the High Court. \par \par On 20 April 1998 the matter came back to Pathik J. for directions. It was agreed that the affidavits already filed be "regarded" as pleadings. The matter w as fixed for hearing for 21 July 1998. The hearing in fact proceeded on 22 July 1998 and continued on 23 July. It was then adjourned until 11 November 1998 when the hearing concluded and the matter was reserved for judgment. \par \par It may be observed that there was no direction for pleadings other than that the affidavits filed in the earlier proceedings were to be treated as pleadings. At the hearing a number of witnesses were called. The principal were the Respondent , Santa Wati, and the Appellant, Ambika Prasad. Additionally, Tahir Ali gave evidence on behalf of the Respondents and Ami Chand, a farmer, gave evidence on behalf of the Appellant. Mr Ali was the President of the Matasawalevu Land Co-operative Society Limited. He had been a member of the Society for 20 years. \par \par Pathik J. delivered judgment in the matter on 22 March 1999. He referred to his earlier judgment and to the appeal to the Court of Appeal. He referred to the witnesses mentioned. He said that there was no doubt that the Plaintiffs, i.e. the now Respondent s, were the registered proprietors of the land. The circumstances under which the Appellant, i.e. the Defendant, came to be on the land were as stated by Mrs Wati in her evidence and also by Mr Ali. Mr Ali said that the Defendant did not pay any money to the Co-operative Society in respect of any land. Pathik J. said that he accepted the evidence of Mrs Wati and Mr Ali. He regarded them as witnesses of truth. He found that the Plaintiff s had become the registered proprietors of the land which gave them an indefeasible title under the Torrens System. He said that in view of these findings of fact the Plaintiff s were entitled to bring proceedings under section 169 of the Land Transfer Act. \par \par Pathik J. said that nothing had been put to Mrs Wati in cross-examination in the nature of fraud. He said that the only question put to her was in relation to payment of the deposit of $700.00 said to have been contributed by Mr Prasad. This was denied by Mrs Wati. His Lordship said that he was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Mr Prasad contributed anything towards the purchase of the land. He added that from the evidence it was clear that }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 the issue of the alleged dealings of the Defendant}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 were with Mrs Wati}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s father, Kali Charan, who was dead. There was no note or memorandum of any kind to show that the Defendant had an equitable interest in the land. \par \par Pathik J. went on to say that the Defendant had testified that he paid half the purchase price for the whole of the l and, namely $700.00, to the Society and a receipt was issued. He said his name was on the receipt but it was crossed out and he did not know by whom. His Lordship said that the original of the alleged receipt had not been produced by either the Plaintiff s or the Defendant. He concluded that there was "no admissible documentary evidence}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 that the Defendant was the one "who actually paid}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 a portion of the purchase price and was entitled to a share in the land. There was no evidence from the Society to show that the Defendant had at any time been regarded as a joint purchaser of the land along with Mrs Wati}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s father, Mr Charan. \par \par Pathik J. said that the Defendant}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s witness, Mr Chand, testified that he prepared the receipt for his (Mr Chand}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s) father. He was secretary of the Society. The receipt he said was in the name of Kali Charan, Santa Wati and Ambika Prasad but that neither the original nor a carbon copy of the alleged receipt was tendered to the court. His L ordship concluded that on the whole of the evidence there was nothing to show that at any time the Defendant had any interest in the land. He added, }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 That is the correct position." \par \par The concluding paragraphs of His Lordship}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s judgment were as follows:-}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard\plain \s18\ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs16\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 To conclude, I find that the Plaintiffs had no knowledge of the Defendant}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s alleged interest in the land when the property was transferred to her by Kali Charan. In fact the Defendant admits that the first Plaintiff was not a party to any alleged arrangement between him and Kali Charan. The Defendant has neither alleged any fraud on the part of the Plaintiffs nor were any questions directed by the Defendant}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s counsel on the alleged fraudulent transfer to the Plaintiffs.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 On what constitutes }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 fraud}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 it has be en considered by me in considerable in my previous judgment herein. The evidence before me does not disclose any elements of fraud on the part of the Plaintiffs. \par }\pard\plain \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 On the evidence before me I am not satisfied on a balance of probabilities that either the Defendant paid the sum alleged to have been paid by him or that he has any beneficial or equitable interest in the land by virtue of him having been brought}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 on the land by the deceased Kali Charan. \par \par }\pard\plain \s18\ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs16\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Finally, if the Defendant had paid a portion of the purchase price and was entitled}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 to an interest in the land then he should have had it reduced to writing as required under section 59(d) of Guarantee Bailment Act Cap. 232.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 His Lordship said that for the reasons he had given the Plaintiffs succeeded on their summons and that there would be an order for possession of the land. \par \par Mr Prasad}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s case was put succinctly}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 in paragraphs 28-31 of his affidavit which was treated as a pleading. In substance those paragraphs said that Mr Prasad had a beneficial interest in the land and that the Plaintiff s had no right or claim to possession. He had been cultivating the land for more than 13 years separately from the deceased, Mr Charan, that is from the time Mr Deo, the second Respondent, came to live with Mrs Wati. Mr Prasad said that if the Plaintiff s had purchased the land as alleged then they did so with full notice and knowledge of his rights in the land. He said the action was designed to defeat his rights after obtaining a fraudulent transfer of the land. He claimed a be neficial interest in the land and was thus entitled to live on, use and occupy it. \par \par In his submissions counsel for the Appellant referred to the notice of appeal, which contains five separate grounds, and consolidated these into the following:-}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid9334887 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard\plain \s18\ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid9334887 \fs16\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 1.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 The le arned trial judge erred in law and in fact in holding that the Appellant no interest in the land at any time.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid2828838 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 2.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 The learned trial judge erred in la w and in fact in holding that the Respondent had no knowledge of the Appellant}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s interest in the land when she acquired the property from Kali Charan.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Counsel said that it was not disputed that the Appellant, Mr Prasad, had been living on and cultivating the land for some time. He said that Mrs Wati had said in her evidence that her father had died seven years before 22 July 1998 when she gave evidence and that the Appellant had been on the land for four years before her father died., Mr Prasad was living on the land and cultivating about 2.5 acres of it when Mrs Wati and Mr Deo acquired the land. Counsel made reference to s.39 of the Land Transfer Act Cap.131, to which we shall refer in detail a little later. It provides for inde feasibility of title. It is clear on the face of the submissions that the central question in this case is whether the two Respondent s have been guilty of fraud within the meaning of s.39 of the Land Transfer Act. Fraud is a matter which would defeat the indefeasibility of title which the Respondents, Mrs Wati and Mr Deo, would otherwise have.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par \par It is necessary before proceeding to deal with his Lordship}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s statement earlier quoted that Mr Prasad had not alleged fraud on the part of the Respondents, Mrs Wati and Mr Deo. That statement cannot be correct. Mr Prasad}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s affidavit was treated as a pleading. It plainly alleges fraud. His case on fraud, as we understand it, is based on a combination of factors, namely, his payment to Mr Charan of $700.00, his long occupation of the land and Mrs Wati}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s and Mr Deo}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s knowledge of these matters. His case is that, knowing of these matters, they procured the registration of a transfer to themselves thus conferring on them an indefeasible title. Mr Prasad}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s case was that the conduct of Mrs Wati and Mr Deo was, in these circumstances, fraudulent. So fraud was at the heart of the case. \par \par There is another matter which needs to be emphasised. The evidence discloses that before Mr Charan}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s death, Mr Prasad built a dwelling on the land which he occupied. The existence of the dwelling no doubt accounts for His Lordship}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s order that either the Respondents, Mrs Wati and Mr Deo, pay Mr Prasad the value of improvements, if any, effected by him on the land which are to be valued by a registered valuer within two months from the date of the order or Mr Prasad be permitted to remove any improvements he had effected on the land. The existence of the dwelling is not a matter dealt with by his Lordship in his j udgment. But he must have been well aware of it for he made the order concerning improvements to which we have referred. \par \par We shall refer to some authorities on fraud in this context in due course. Counsel said that there was ample evidence that the Respondents had knowledge of the fact that the Appellant was occupying and cultivating more than two acres of the land. There is no question about that being the case. But whether that of itself amounts to fraud on the part of the Respondents is far from clear. \par \par In his submissions counsel for the Respondents put the matter fairly and squarely as one where a judge had heard conflicting evidence and accepted the evidence of the Respondents. The Appellant was therefore faced with adverse findings of fact by a Judge who had seen and heard the witnesses. The circumstances under which an appellate court would interfere with such findings were limited. \par \par An initial question is whether His Lordship}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s finding in relation to the alleged payment of $700.00, should be disturbed. As counsel for the Respondent s has submitted, the learned Judge saw and heard the witnesses. It was open to him on the evidence which he had to reach the conclusion which he did. We detect no misdirection or other error which would warrant the interference of this court in rela tion to his finding that he was not satisfied that the sum of $700.00 had been paid. \par \par What then is left? As counsel for Mr Prasad conceded, there are only the facts that Mr Prasad over a number of years occupied portion of the land, lived on it and cultiva ted it. There is some evidence of disputes between Mr Charan and Mr Prasad and some indication in the evidence that some of these disputes went to court. But nothing was done to have Mr Prasad removed from the property either b y Mr Charan in his lifetime or by Mrs Wati and Mr Deo until the present proceedings were instituted. Undoubtedly, Mrs Wati and Mr Deo were well aware of the fact of Mr Prasad}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s occupation of the land and of the fact that he cultivated it and kept the proceeds of the sale of produce grown on the land for himself. \par \par The question is whether those matters alone are sufficient to indicate fraudulent conduct on the part of Mrs Wati and Mr Deo when they became registered as proprietors of the land in circumstances where they had knowledge of Mr Prasad}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s occupation and activities on the land. \par \par In order to give that matter proper consideration it is necessary now to refer to the provisions of s.39 of the Land Transfer Act.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart s39_1_LTA_Ambika_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati_Deo}S.39 (1) {\*\bkmkend s39_1_LTA_Ambika_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati_Deo}is as follows:}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid9334887 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard\plain \s18\ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid9334887 \fs16\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 39.\emdash (1) Notwithstanding the existence in any other person of any or interest, whether derived by grant from the [State] or otherwise, which but for this Act might be held to be paramount or to have priority, the registered p roprietor of any land subject to the provisions of this Act, or of any estate or interest therein, shall, }{\fs24\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 except in case of fraud,}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 hold the same subject to}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 such encumbrances as may be notified on the folium of the register, constituted by the instrument of title thereto, but absolutely free from all other encumbrances whatsoever except\emdash }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid2828838 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 (a) \tab the estate or interest of a proprietor claiming the same land, estate or interest under a prior instrument of title registered under the provisions of this Act; and}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid2828838 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 (b) \tab so far as regards any portion of land that may by wrong description or parcels or of boundaries be erroneously included in the instrument of title of the registered proprietor not being a purchaser or mortgagee for value or deriving title from a purc haser or mortgagee for value; and}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid2828838 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 (c) \tab any reservations, exceptions, conditions and powers contained in the original grant.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid9334887\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 The emphasis is added. \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart s39_2_LTA_Ambika_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati_Deo}S.39(2) {\*\bkmkend s39_2_LTA_Ambika_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati_Deo}deals with possessory titl es and is not relevant for present purposes. With s.39 should be read s.40 which provides that, except in the case of fraud, no person contracting or dealing with or taking or proposing to take a transfer from the proprietor of an y estate or interest in land subject to the provisions of the Act shall be required or in any manner concerned to inquire or ascertain the circumstances in or the consideration for which such proprietor or any previous proprietor of such estate or interes t is or was registered. \par \par In order to deal with counsel}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s submissions, it is necessary to refer to some authorities. Sections 39 and {\*\bkmkstart s40_LTA_Ambika_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati_Deo}40{\*\bkmkend s40_LTA_Ambika_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati_Deo} of the Land Transfer Act are in a common form. They have their counterparts in many countries including Australia and New Zealand. There have been very many cases dealing with what will amount to fraud in given sets of circumstances. Each case must, of course, depend upon its own facts and circumstan ces and it is to the authorities that one goes, not to compare factual situations, but for the principles which guide one in determining whether, in a given case, fraud exists. Perhaps the best known statement of what will, and what will not amount to fraud is to be found in the judgment of Salmond J., a member of the New Zealand Court of Appeal, which determined the case of }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart Waimiha_v_Waione_A_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}Waimiha Sawmilling}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Co. }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkend Waimiha_v_Waione_A_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}Ltd.}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Waione Timber Co. Ltd.}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 [1923] NZLR 1137. In the course of his judgment Salmond J. said (at 11 74-5):}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5466213\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid2828838 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Where a purchaser actually knows for certain of the existence of an adverse right which will be destroyed by his purchase}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 he is, as already indicated, guilty of fraud. Where, on the contrary,}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 he has}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 no knowledge that such a right exists or is even claimed he is}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 a purchaser in good faith. In between these two extremes there lie those intermediate cases in which, although there is}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 no}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 certain}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 knowledge of}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 the existence of an}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 adverse}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 right}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 , }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 there is knowledge of a claim and of the possibility of that claim being well founded. The purchaser does not actually know that the right exists, but he knows that it may exist, but he knows that it may exist, or fears or suspects that it exists, or doubts whether it exists or not. If in such circumstances and in such a state}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 of mind he}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 acquires the property intending to hold it for an unencumbered title and to destroy the}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 right in question}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 if it does exist, is}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 the case one of fraud or}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 one of }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 bona fides}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 within the meaning of the Act? An extreme view, which}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 cannot be}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 supported, would all cases of this kind within the sphere of fraud. According}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 to this view, knowledge of the existence of an adverse}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 claim, coupled with an intent to defeat that claim by a}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 purchase of the property, is always inconsistent with good faith, even though}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 the claim is}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 not known}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 or believed to be well founded. This view, however, is}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 not in conformity either with}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 the spirit and purpose of the Land Transfer Act}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 or with}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 any reasonable standard of good honest dealing. One of the main objects of the Land Transfer Act is to facilitate the alienation}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 of land by eliminating the encumbering influence of unregistered}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 interests}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 , }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 and by relieving purchasers}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 from the necessity of inquiring into the existence and validity}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 of adverse equitable claims and interests. Moreover,}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 a proper standard of honesty}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 and good faith regards the interests}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 of the owner no less}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 than those of the adverse}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 claimants}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 . }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 An owner}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 of land is not necessarily bound}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 to abstain from alienating his property of the existence of some adverse claim}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 which he does not know or believe to be well founded, and because he}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 knows that the effect of such alienation under the Land Transfer Act will}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 be to}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 destroy that claim. Nor is a purchaser necessarily bound to}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 abstain from acquiring the property for the same reason. Good faith requires that}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 due consideration be given to the conflicting interests}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 both of the owner and of}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 the claimant in such a case,}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 and}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 not that exclusive consideration be}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 given to the interests}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 of one of them only. Knowledge, therefore, that an}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 adverse claim exists, that it may possibly}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 } {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 be}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 founded, and that it will be destroyed by }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 an alienation of the property, is not in itself sufficient to stamp the transaction as fraudulent within the of the meaning Land Transfer Act.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5466213\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 The decision of the New Zealand Court of Appeal in the }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Waimiha}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 case was upheld by the Privy Council, 1926 AC 1 01. What Salmond J. said has been cited many times by Judges in Australia and New Zealand and also by the Privy Council when dealing with appeals from the courts of those countries. \par \par What Salmond J. said towards the end of the passage quoted from his judgment was echoed by Kitto J. of the Australian High Court in }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart Mills_v_Stokman_Am_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}Mills}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Stokman}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkend Mills_v_Stokman_Am_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}(1967) 116 CLR 61 where his Honour said (at 78) that merely to take a transfer with notice or even knowledge that its registration will defeat an existing unregistered interest is not fraud. \par \par In }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart Fraser_v_Walker_Ambi_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}Frazer}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Walker}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkend Fraser_v_Walker_Ambi_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}[1967] AC 569 the Privy Council said (at 580) that }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 fraud}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 , where used in a similar provision, meant actual fraud; in other words dishonesty. \par \par In }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart Bahr_v_Nicolay_2_Am_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}Bahr v Nicolay}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkend Bahr_v_Nicolay_2_Am_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}[No. 2] (1988) 164 CLR 604 the question of what would amount to fraud was considered by the Australian High Court. There Wilson and Toohey JJ. said that the fraud referred to was actual fraud, involving some act of dishonesty on the part of the person whose title was sought to be impeached. They continued (at 630):}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid5466213\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard \ql \li440\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin440\itap0\pararsid2828838 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 It is}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 equally}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 clear}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 to acquire land with notice of an unregistered interest such as a lease to become the registered proprietor and then to refuse to acknowledge the existence of the interest is not of itself fraud}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 : }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart Oertel_v_Hordern_Am_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}Oertel v Hordern}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkend Oertel_v_Hordern_Am_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}(1902) 2 S.R. (N.S.W.) (Eq.) 37; }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart Wicks_v_Bennett_Am_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}Wicks}{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v Bennett{\*\bkmkend Wicks_v_Bennett_Am_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}; Friedman v Barrett; }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 Ex parte}{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Friedman}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 [1962] Qd. R. 498);}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart RM_Hosking_v_Barnes_A_Prasad_v_Sant_Wati}R. M Hosking Properties v Barnes}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkend RM_Hosking_v_Barnes_A_Prasad_v_Sant_Wati}[1971] S.A.S.R. 100;}{ \i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart Achatz_v_De_Reuver_Ambika_v_Santa}Achatz v De Reuver}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkend Achatz_v_De_Reuver_Ambika_v_Santa}([1971] S.A.S.R. 240. The point is made by Kitto J. in }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Mills v Stokman}{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 (1967) 116 CLR 61, at p.78, where his Honour said }{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 but merely to take a transfer with notice or even knowledge that its registration will defeat an ex isting unregistered interest is not fraud.}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838\charrsid2828838 "}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2828838 {\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 There was some difference of view concerning the correct approach to the problem expressed in the joint judgment of Mason CJ and Dawson J. (at 614). They said that not all species of equitable fraud stood outside the statutory concept of fraud. What was there said is not material for present purposes and it may be noted that their Honours concluded their discussion by saying (at 614) that, according to the decisions of the High Court, actual fraud, personal dishonesty or moral turpitude lie at the heart of the two sections and their counterparts. They refer red to }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart Butler_v_Fairclough_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}Butler}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Fairclough}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkend Butler_v_Fairclough_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}(1917) 23 CLR 78 at 90, 97. \par \par In the submission of counsel for the Respondents in this case the various dicta to which reference has been made establish that the circumstances of this case are not to be regarded as fraudulent. So much of the Appellant}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s case as is dependent upon the payment of the $700.00 has been taken away by his Lordship}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s finding which we consider should not be disturbed. What is left, as we have said, is knowledge of the Appellant}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 s occupation and cultivation of the land. That is all. \par \par In support of his submissions, counsel for the Appellant referred to two decisions of this court, namely }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart Dharam_Pal_v_S_Pal_A_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}Dharam Pal}{ \b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Suruj Pal}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkend Dharam_Pal_v_S_Pal_A_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}(14 July 1975, Civil Appeal No. 66 of 1974) and }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkstart Gajadhar_v_Pal_Ambik_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}Gajadhar}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{ \b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 v}{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 }{\b\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 ]ai Pal}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 {\*\bkmkend Gajadhar_v_Pal_Ambik_Prasad_v_Santa_Wati}(21 July 1982, Civil Appeal No. 49 of 1981). We have read these judgments. They contain elaborate analyses of the law on this matter and they refer to a number of authorities including some of those referred to by us. There is nothing in the discussion of the principles which apply which runs counter to the thrust of the authorities to which we have referred. The cases of course involve the application of the relevant principles to different sets of facts but it is not profitable for us to examine the facts of the two cases be cause the facts of each case differ in substance from those of the present one. \par \par In all the circumstances we have reached the conclusion that the Appellant has not made out a case of fraud. He has not established that he has any legal or equitable right in the land. On the authorities to which we have referred there is no basis for imputing fraud to the Respondents. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed. We order the Appellant to pay the Respondents}{\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid2828838 '}{ \fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 costs of the appeal which are assessed at $1000.00. \par }{\b\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 \par }{\i\fs24\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Appeal dismissed. \par \par }\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5466213 \fs24\lang3081\langfe3081\cgrid\langnp3081\langfenp3081 {\insrsid1002006\charrsid2828838 Marie Chan}{ \lang2057\langfe3081\langnp2057\insrsid1972231\charrsid5466213 \par }}