same to contain to purchase the same.. acres of land, and thereby induced the plaintiff 2. That the said land contained only acres, instead of acres, the quantity sold to the plaintiff by defendant. Form No. 202. 18 Plaintiff states: 1. That by an instrument in writing, dated the , the defendant, in consideration of Rs. day of to him paid, sold to the plaintiff (describe the property), and by the said instrument contracted with the plaintiff as follows: (or contracted with the plaintiff that the said premises were free from all incumbrances). 2. That at the time of the execution of the said contract the premises were not free from all incumbrances, but, on the contrary, the defendant before that time, on the day of 18 at by an instrument in the nature of a mortgage, duly executed and registered, had mortgaged the said premises to one A B to secure the payment of Rs. with interest. 3. And for a further breach, the plaintiff alleges that at the time of the making of the said contract the premises were subject to a tax, theretofore duly assessed, charged, and levied upon the said premises by , and which tax was then remaining of the sum of Rs. due and unpaid, and was, at the time of the making of the said contract, a lien and incumbrance by law upon the said premises. 4. That by reason thereof the plaintiff paid on the 18 the sum of Rs. day of in extinguishing (here state whether mortgage, lien, tax, or other incumbrances, or all of them) aforesaid to his damage Rs. Form No. 203. THE SAME WHERE THE CONVEYANCE EXCEPTED A SPECIFIC Plaintiff states: INCUMBRANCE. 18 1. That by an instrument in writing, dated the the defendant, in consideration of Rs. to the plaintiff (here describe the property), day of to him paid, sold 2. That by the said instrument the premises conveyed were described as being subject, nevertheless, to the payment of a certain mortgage registered in the office of the sub-registrar of in Book A of mortgages; and no other incumbrances were mentioned or specified in said instrument, as existing upon or affecting said premises, or the title thereto. 3. That by the said instrument the defendant contracted with the plaintiff as follows: (copy the words of the contract). 4. That at the time of the execution of the said instrument, the said premises were not free from all incumbrances other than the mortgage therein excepted, but, on the contrary (here set out any incumbrances as breaches, and conclude as in preceding form). Plaintiff states: Form No. 204. 1. That by an instrument in writing, dated the day of 18 the defendant, for a valuable consideration, conveyed to the plaintiff (describe the property), and by the said instrument contracted with the plaintiff as follows:: 2. That at the time of the execution of the said instrument, the defendant was not the true, lawful, and rightful owner, and had not in himself, at the said time, good right, full power, &c. (negative the words of the contract). 3. Whereby plaintiff has sustained damage in the sum of Rs. Form No. 205. GRANTEE'S BREACH OF CONTRACT TO BUILD. Plaintiff states: 1. That in consideration that the plaintiff would sell and convey to the defendant a piece of land (describe it) for the sum of Rs. the defendant, on the day of 18, agreed that he would, erect upon the premises a good brick-house, to be occupied as a dwelling, and that he would not erect upon the premises any building that would be a nuisance to the vicinity of the premises. F. P.--19 2. That the plaintiff did accordingly sell and convey to the defendant said premises for said sum; but defendant has not erected a good brick-house on the land to be occupied as a dwelling, but, on the contrary, has erected upon said premises a wooden building to be used as a slaughter-house, 3. That the defendant has prevented other lots in the vicinity, owned by the plaintiff, from becoming valuable to the plaintiff, as they otherwise would have become, and has injuriously affected their condition, and hindered the plaintiff from selling them, to his damage Rs. 18 the plaintiff sold and conveyed to the defendant, for a valuable consideration, a piece of land (describe it). 2. That by the said instrument defendant contracted with the plaintiff as follows: (copy the words of the contract). 3. That the defendant has erected, and suffered and permitted to be erected, on said premises, a building occupied and used as a slaughterhouse. 4. That the offal and blood in, and carried out from, said slaughterhouse, and the offensive smell created thereby, is a nuisance to the vicinity of the said premises and to the plaintiff, whose house is adjoining, to his damage Rs. Form No. 207. ON A CONTRACT TO MAINTAIN A FENCE. Plaintiff states :— 1. That on the day of 18, the plaintiff and defend ant then were the owners of lands adjoining, situated (describe them), and then made an agreement in writing, of which the following is a copy (copy agreement). 2. That the plaintiff has duly performed all the conditions thereof on his part. 3. That the defendant did not, after the erection of said fence, maintain the same, and keep it in continual repair, but, on the contrary, in the month of 18, he suffered the same to become dilapi dated and broken down, and to remain in that condition from that time until the day of 18. 4. That by means thereof the plaintiff suffered great damage by the injury to his lands and crops thereon, and his garden and fruit-trees, by cattle coming through said dilapidated fence from the defendant's land upon the plaintiff's premises, and that plaintiff was compelled to repair and re-build said fence in order to protect his land from the damage caused by said cattle, to the damage of plaintiff Rs. Form No. 208. ON A CONTRACT TO KEEP PREMISES IN REPAIR-LESSOR Plaintiff states :— 1. That on the day of 18, by a lease in writing, the plaintiff leased to the defendant, and the defendant rented from the plaintiff, for one year from said date, at a monthly rent of Rs. a certain dwelling-house in (describe the same), the property of plaintiff. 2. That by the said lease the defendant contracted with the plaintiff as follows: (copy the words of the contract) [or contracted with the plaintiff to keep the said house and premises in good and substantial repair during the said term]. 3. That the defendant entered upon the premises and occupied the same during the said term of one year under said agreement; but that he has failed to keep the said house and premises in good and substantial repair; but, on the contrary (state injuries to premises), and the house and premises otherwise injured by reason of the neglect. of the defendant to keep them in good repair, to the damage of the plaintiff Rs. Liability of Tenant.-No contract to repair is implied from the fact of the relation of landlord and tenant being created.* * Standen v. Christmas, 10 Q. B. 135; Granger v. Collins, 6 M. and W. 458. Measure of Damages.—In a suit against a tenant for breach of his contract to keep the premises in repair, the measure of damages during the continuance of the lease is the diminution in value of the reversion;* and this depends on the age, character, and state of the premises on the creation of the tenancy.† Form No. 209. THE SAME-LESSEE AGAINST LESSOR, Plaintiff states: 1. and 2. (Allege as in preceding form.) 3. That the plaintiff entered into possession of said premises under said lease, and used the same as a warehouse for storing various articles of merchandise. 4. That the defendant has failed to keep the premises in repair, and has allowed (state neglect and special damage caused thereby), to the damage of the plaintiff Rs. Form No. 210. QUIET ENJOYMENT. Plaintiff states: 1. That by an instrument in writing, dated the day of 18 the defendant let to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff rented from the defendant, the house No. in street for the term of three years, and thereby contracted with plaintiff that he should quietly enjoy possession thereof for the said term. 2. That on the day of 18 one A B, who was the lawful owner of the said house, lawfully evicted the plaintiff therefrom, and still withholds the possession thereof from him. 3. That the plaintiff was thereby prevented from continuing the business of at the said place, and was compelled to expend in moving, and lost the custom of C, D, E, F, G, and H, and divers other persons, by such removal. Rs. * Turner v. Lamb, 14 M. and W. 412; Doe v. Rowlands, 9 C. and P. 734; Smith v. Peat, 9 Ex. 161; Mills. v. East London Union, L. R., 8 C. P. 79; 42 L. J., C. P., 46; Williams v. Williams, L. R., 9 C. P. 659. + Payne v. Haine, 16 M. and W. 541; Stanley v. Towgood, 3 Bing N. C. 4; Bindell v. Withers, 7 A. and E, 136. |