The taking of possession, coupled with the making of part payment, in reliance upon and with unequivocal reference to the vendor-vendee relationship, without proof of irreparable injury through fraud, is sufficient to avoid the statute. See, Seitz v. Sitze, 215 Minn. 452, 10 N.W. (2d) 426; Johlfs v. Cattoor, 193 Minn. 553, 259 N.W. 57; Ritchie v. Jennings, 181 Minn. 458, 233 N.W. 20; Atkins v. Little, 17 Minn. 320 (342); Phillips v. Jones, 79 Ark. 100, 95 S.W. 164, 9 Ann. Cas. 131; Sprague v. Jessup, 48 Or. 211, 218, 83 P. 145, 148, 84 P. 802, 4 L.R.A.(N.S.) 410, 415; Bomier v. Caldwell, 8 Mich. 463, 475; Jutten v. Deeble, 88 Colo. 301, 295 P. 496; 6 Dunnell, Dig. & Supp. § 8885; 49 Am. Jur., Statute of Frauds, §§ 433, 435; 21 Minn. L. Rev. 224. See, Seitz v. Sitze, supra; Hatlestad v. Mutual Trust L. Ins. Co. 197 Minn. 640, 268 N.W. 665; Biddle v. Whitmore, 134 Minn. 68, 158 N.W. 808; Pierce v. Hanson, 147 Minn. 219, 179 N.W. 893; Koch v. Fischer, 122 Minn. 123, 142 N.W. 18; Place v. Johnson, 20 Minn. 198 (219); Gill v. Newell, 13 Minn. 430 (462); ...