BAILMENT: RESPONSIBILITY TO BAILEE

Home Forums Bailment – Responsibility of Bailee BAILMENT: RESPONSIBILITY TO BAILEE

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 1 reply thread
  • Author
    Posts
    • #390
      ASHISH RANJAN
      Keymaster

      Can the bailee be sued for not delivering goods to the real owner as he assumes another person to be the real owner in good faith?

      The question mentioned above is related to section 166 of Indian Contract Act, 1872. The section clearly states that “if the bailor has no title to the goods, and the bailee, in good faith, delivers them back to, or according to the direction of, the bailor, the bailee is not responsible to the owner in respect of such delivery.”

      The interpretation of this section clarifes that the bailee cannot be sued if the baluee deliver them back in good faith. If the bailee has delivered tha good as per the direction of bailor, he can not be held responsible for the same.
      Similar, if it any suspicion appears to the bailed that the person claiming the good, may not be the owner, then in such case the bailee can sue to find out whether the person is real owner or not. In both the situations, the bailee can not be sued as the bailee was acting in good faith.

    • #624
      Nikita Soni

      Question: “Can the bailee be sued for not delivering goods to the real owner as he assumes another person to be the real owner in good faith?”
      Reply: This question can be answered through section 166 of Indian Contract Act, which states that “Bailee not responsible on re-delivery to bailor without title.—If the bailor has no title to the goods, and the bailee, in good faith, delivers them back to, or according to the directions of, the bailor, the bailee is not responsible to the owner in respect of such delivery”
      The purpose of law in India is not to held liable but to make people accountable for their actions. The intention is one of the main objects or we can say criteria to make someone liable for their actions, as this question specifically shows that bailee assumes another person as real owner, there is no bad intention so he cannot be liable or we can say he cannot be sued .
      For example: If A and B are partners and C is bailee who gets the truck for purpose of Bailment by A, after sometimes C returns Truck to B in the assumption of B being partner so he can have title. So A cannot sue C for not delivering Truck to him

Viewing 1 reply thread
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Comments are closed.