JUDGMENT

Brown J:

This is an appeal from an order granting a stay of execution in a possession case. The order for possession had been made upon the ground that the defendant had used or permitted the premises to be used for an illegal purpose, viz. the keeping of pigs without a licence from the Rural Board.

The application for a stay of execution was not made at the conclusion of the case, and when the application was subsequently made no affidavit in support was filed. The learned District Judge explains this upon the ground that the plaintiff's Counsel, while drawing attention to the absence of an affidavit, took no objection upon that ground, and as the facts were within the knowledge of the Court the application was heard as if it had been made at the conclusion of the case. In this Court Counsel for the appellant does not agree that he took no objection before the learned District Judge.

The learned District Judge had a discretion to grant a stay of execution. And I should not think it right to interfere with the exercise of his discretion if I was satisfied that he had exercised it on correct principles. There is no rule of practice limiting the exercise of his discretion.