Page images

and of all proceedings relating thereto, except such as are occasioned by litigation between adverse claimants: Provided always, that the costs of one application only for reinvestment in land shall be allowed, unless it shall appear to the Court that it is for the benefit of the parties interested in the monies, that the same should be invested in the purchase of lands, in different sums, and at different times, in which case the Court may order the costs of any such investments to be paid by the company (i). (8 Vict. c. 18, s. 80, post, App., 135).

And, if any question arises respecting the title to the land, in respect whereof any monies shall have been paid or deposited, the parties respectively in possession of the lands as owners, or in receipt of the rents, or being entitled thereto, at the time of such lands being purchased or taken, shall be deemed to have been lawfully entitled to the lands, until the contrary be shewn to the satisfaction of the Court; and, unless the contrary be so shewn, the parties so in possession, and all parties claiming under them, or consistently with their possession, shall be deemed entitled to the money so deposited, and to the dividends or interest of the securities purchased therewith. (Id., s. 79, post, App., 135).

When money has been deposited, the statute proceeds to provide, that, upon application of parties making claim to it, or to the lands in respect whereof the deposit was made, or any interest in the same, the Courts above mentioned may, in a summary way, as to them shall seem fit, order the money to be laid out and invested in the public funds, or

(1) In two cases where the Court had a discretion as to the allowance of the costs of investment, the costs of two applications were given. Ex parte Eton College, 3 Railway Cases, 271; Ex parte Trustees of Waste Lands of Boxmoor, Id. 513.


another case, where the costs of a
third investment out of a sum of
£125,000 were asked for, the Vice-
Chancellor granted the application.
In the matter of St. Katherine's
Dock Company, 3 Railway Cases,

The Payment or Investment of Com pensation-money.

The Payment or Investment of Compensation-money.

may order distribution thereof, or payment of the dividends thereof, according to the respective estates, titles, or interests of the parties making claim to such money or lands, and may make such other order in the premises, as to the said Court shall seem fit. (8 Vict. c. 18, s. 78; and see Id., s. 79, post, App., 134).

The following important cases have been decided on Railway Acts, which contained similar provisions to the above: In Ex parte Grainge (k), a petition was presented, which stated the following facts:-That certain commissioners, under an act for inclosing lands in the parish of Harlington, had, by their award, made in 1821, allotted and awarded to the petitioner a piece of freehold land, situate in that parish; the petitioner had, ever since the making of the award, until the time thereafter mentioned, been in possession of the land, and in the receipt of the rents and profits; that the petitioner having received notice from the Great Western Railway Company that they would require the allotment for the purposes of the railway, it was agreed between the parties that the value of the allotment should be determined by a surveyor, and that the amount of the valuation, and of the petitioner's costs, should be paid by the company to the petitioner; that the surveyor, in 1837, certified the value, and an abstract of the petitioner's title was, thereupon, delivered to the company; but that the company, without the petitioner's consent, took possession of the land, and, having some objections to the title, they paid the amount of the purchase-money, &c. into the Bank, in the name of the accountant-general; and that such sum was, at the time of presenting this petition, remaining uninvested. The petition then prayed, that the money might be ordered to be paid to the petitioner, and that the company might pay the

(k) 3 Y. & Coll. 62.

costs of the petition; the petitioner, by his affidavit, stating, in addition to the foregoing facts, that he was not aware of any right in any other person, or of any claim made by any other person, to the said money so paid into the Bank, or to the said allotment of land. Alderson, B., observed, that there were great objections to such an application as the present, as it was obvious that the party applying for the money might have a very limited interest in the lands. He, however, would consider himself bound by the decisions. of other judges, and would therefore examine the orders which had been made in the cases cited, and deliver his opinion on a future day. And, on a subsequent day, his lordship said, that he had examined the orders made by former judges, and that, upon the authority of those orders, he felt himself bound to accede to the application.

A similar application was afterwards made (1), in the matter of the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway Act, there being no other evidence of the title of the lands than the applicant's affidavit. Upon that occasion, the same learned Judge said, "I am bound by the authorities, though I do not comprehend them. The party may sell to the company lands in strict settlement, and then apply for the money out of court. However, the order must be made" (m).

(1) Ex parte Grainge, 3 Y. & Coll. 66, n. (b).

(m) The party who applies under these sections must strictly verify his title, and state, that, to his knowledge and belief, no other person has any title to, or claims any interest to the estate. Ex parte Shears, 2 Y. & Jer. 493. And if it appears to the court of equity, when a petition is pre

sented, that there is a dispute re-
specting the title of the petitioner, it
seems to be the practice to direct an
issue to determine the question. Ex
parte Issauchaud, 3 Y. & Coll. 721.
As to whether an incumbrancer may
apply by petition under the above
statute, see Ex parte Back, 2 Y. &
Jer. 386.

The Payment or pensation-money,

Investment of Com

On the title to and
conveyance of
the lands.

VII. When lands are purchased of the company by agreement, or are taken under the compulsory powers contained in the special act, the owner or other party entitled to sell or convey the lands is bound to make out a good title; and it is usual to deliver an abstract of the title to the company (n), as in the case of an ordinary sale of lands (0). The owner is also required to execute a conveyance to the company. But, to prevent the inconvenience which would result by the neglect or inability of the party to perfect the title, and make the conveyance, the statute contains the following wholesome provision:

If the owner of any lands purchased or taken by the company, or of any interest therein, on tender of the purchase-money or compensation, either agreed or awarded to be paid in respect thereof, refuses to accept the same, or neglects or fails to make out a title to the lands, or to the interest therein claimed by him, to the satisfaction of the company; or if he refuses to convey or release the lands as directed by the company; or if any such owner be absent from the kingdom, or cannot, after diligent inquiry, be found; or if he fails to appear on the inquiry before a jury; then, in either of the above-mentioned cases (p), the com

(n) In the absence of an agreement to the contrary, the costs of making out the title are paid by the company. See post, 338; and see the evidence given before the Lords' Committee, ante, 273.

(0) It seems to be the practice of railway companies to be satisfied with a good holding title. See the evidence given before the Lords' Committee, ante, 273.

(p) These words are prospective in their operation. Thus, where a

railway act empowered a railway company to summon a jury in cases where the owner of lands failed to disclose or prove his title, and, an owner having failed to comply with the act in this particular, a jury was summoned, and the amount of compensation assessed; whereupon the company, without calling upon the owner to produce his title, paid the amount of the compensation into the Bank, in pursuance of a clause in the railway act, similar in its terms to

pany may deposit the purchase-money or compensation payable in respect of the lands or any interest therein, in the Bank of England, to the credit of the parties interested in such lands, subject to the control and disposition of the Court of Chancery in England, or the Court of Exchequer in Ireland. (Id., s. 76, post, App., 134). When the money has been thus deposited, the cashier of the Bank is required to give the company a receipt for the same; and the company may then, if they think fit, execute a deed-poll (q), containing a description of the lands, and declaring the circumstances under which the deposit has been made; "and thereupon all the estate and interest in such lands of the

the above, and took possession of the lands; it was held by the Court of Exchequer, that the company were not authorized to take this step. Rolfe, B., observed, “It is clear that the object of this act was to enable the parties claiming compensation for their lands to make out their title after the jury had assessed the amount of that compensation. Here an offer was made by the company, which the plaintiff treats as a nullity; on which the company, who want the land for their works, apply to a jury to assess the compensation, and it is assessed accordingly. Now, after that was done, they were bound to call on him to shew his title; and until they do so, they have no right to take possession of his land by paying the amount of the compensationmoney into Chancery. Neither the letter nor the spirit of the act bears out such a construction, and it would be most unjust, if it did." Doe d. Hutchinson v. The Manchester, Bury, and Rossendale Railway Company, 14 M. & W. 687; 9 Jur. 949.

(9) This deed must be stamped with the stamp-duty which would have been payable upon a conveyance of the land. 8 Vict. c. 18, s, 77, post, App., 134. Railway companies will probably be advised, in all cases which fall under the purview of the 77th section, to perfect their title by executing a deed-poll in pursuance of the statute. It seems to have been the intention of the Legislature (probably with a view to the Stamp Acts) to require a conveyance in all cases. It should here be mentioned, that, in the following cases, it was decided that lands may be vested otherwise than by an actual conveyance. Bruce v. Willis, 11 A. & E. 463; 2 Railway Cases, 7; 3 P. & Dav. 220; Doe d. Robins v. Warwick Canal Company, 2 Bing. N. C. 483; 2 Scott, 7; Earl of Harborough V. Shardlow, 7 M. & W. 87; 2 Rail. way Cases, 253. But it will be found that the provisions inserted in the 8 Vict. c. 18, differ materially from those which are inserted in the Canal Acts above referred to.

The Title to and Conveyance of the Lands.

« EelmineJätka »