Additionally, the general rule which prevails in this jurisdiction is that a motion for a new trial should not be granted unless it appears that a different result would follow a retrial. Blaine v. Byers, supra; Consumers Credit Co. v. Manifold, 65 Idaho 238, 142 P.2d 150, and cases cited therein. The trial court, therefore, committed no error in denying appellant's motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and his motion for a new trial.

Additionally, the general rule which prevails in this jurisdiction is that a motion for a new trial should not be granted unless it appears that a different result would follow a retrial. See Consumers Credit Co. v. Manifold, 65 Idaho 238, 142 P.2d 150, and cases therein cited. While agreeing with appellants that the trial judge had the responsibility and obligation to actually weigh the evidence to determine whether the record reasonably supported the assessment of damages in this case, we find erroneous their conclusion, based upon statements taken out of context from the trial court's memorandum decision, that the trial judge abdicated this responsibility.

Must also show new evidence would probably change result. Friedman Bag Co. v. F.E. Baldwin Co., 57 Idaho 607, 623, 624, 68 P.2d 43; Consumers Credit Co. v. Manifold, 65 Idaho 238, 246, 142 P.2d 150; Papineau v. Idaho First National Bank, 74 Idaho 145, 150, 258 P.2d 755; C.R. Crowley, Inc. v. Soelberg, 81 Idaho 480, 487, 346 P.2d 1063. Buyer cannot claim reliance upon representations and rescission where he treated agreement as subsisting after discovery of alleged facts.

In Merchants Rating Adjusting Co. v. Skaug, 4 Wn.2d 46, 102 P.2d 227, 229-230 ( Sup. Ct. 1940), the Washington Supreme Court held that a chattel mortgagee who failed to join the mortgagor in an application for a new certificate of ownership lost his lien with respect to subsequent purchasers or mortgagees without notice thereof although he had recorded his chattel mortgage in the county of residence of the mortgagor and the pertinent state motor vehicle act did not expressly render the mortgage void under these circumstances. Cf. Consumers Credit Co. v.Manifold, 65 Idaho 238, 142 P.2d 150 ( Sup. Ct. 1943). See also Automobiles-Registration of Title and Transfer-Effecton Ownership, 37 Mich. L. Rev. 758 (1939); Automobiles:Effect of Non-Compliance with Statutes Governing Transfer ofMotor Vehicles on Civil Rights and Liabilities, 28 Calif. L.Rev. 64 (1939).

Of course, if a creditor has a lien, as required by the foregoing rules, his right takes precedence over the rights of the mortgagee. Consumers Credit Co. v. Manifold, 65 Idaho 238, 142 P.2d 150; Yelverton Hardware Co. v. W.A. Piland Sons Garage Co., 184 N.C. 125, 113 S.E. 601; Power Mfg. Co. v. Bailey, 33 Del. 129, 131 A. 696. In the case at bar the plaintiff never acquired any lien. He cannot acquire any now, after the appointment of a receiver.

Idaho Code § 10-605; Palmer v. Quinn-Robins Co., 52 Idaho 661, 18 P.2d 917; Savage v. Stokes, 54 Idaho 109, 28 P.2d 900; Kelley v. Clark, 21 Idaho 231, 121 P. 95; Behrensmeyer v. Gwinn, 25 Idaho 186, 136 P. 623; Smith v. American Falls etc., Co., 15 Idaho 89, 95 P. 1059. If a jury's verdict is reasonable on any basis and is supported by evidence, a new trial should never be granted. 39 Am.Jur., 140, § 310; Consumer's Credit Co. v. Manifold, 65 Idaho 238, 142 P.2d 150; Baldwin v. Ewing, 69 Idaho 176, 204 P.2d 430; Comess v. Norfolk Gen. Hosp., 189 Va. 229, 52 S.E.2d 125; Johnson v. United Electric Co., 361 Pa. 449, 65 A.2d 236. The granting of a new trial rests with the discretion of the trial court and an order granting a new trial will not be disturbed in absence of abuse of discretion. Jacksha v. Gilbert, 4 Idaho 738, 44 P. 555; Brossard v. Morgan, 6 Idaho 479, 56 P. 163; Wolfe v. Ridley, 17 Idaho 173, 104 P. 1014, 20 Ann.Cas. 39; Say v. Hodgin, 20 Idaho 64, 116 P. 410; Turner v. First National Bank, 42 Idaho 597, 248 P. 14; Baillie v. City of Wallace, 22 Idaho 702, 127 P. 908; Buckle v. McConaghy, 12 Idaho 733, 88 P. 100; Penninger Lateral Co. v. Clark, 20 Idaho 166, 117 P. 764.