All Exams >
CA Foundation >
Business Laws for CA Foundation >
All Questions
All questions of Unit 3: Transfer of Ownership and Delivery of Goods for CA Foundation Exam
A delivers a horse to B for trial for 8 days. It was agreed that sale would be completed if the horse was found suitable for B’s purpose. The horse died on 3rd day without any fault of either party. It was held that contract was: - a)Completed
- b)To be completed
- c)Void
- d)Illegal
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
A delivers a horse to B for trial for 8 days. It was agreed that sale would be completed if the horse was found suitable for B’s purpose. The horse died on 3rd day without any fault of either party. It was held that contract was:
a)
Completed
b)
To be completed
c)
Void
d)
Illegal
|
Devanshi Rane answered |
's needs. During the trial period, B rode the horse daily and tested its abilities. On the 8th day, B notified A that the horse was not suitable and returned it to A. The sale was not completed and A refunded B the deposit that was made for the trial.
In case of sale on approval, the ownership is transferred to the buyer when he: - a)Accepts the goods
- b)Adopts the transaction
- c)Fails to return goods within the specified time
- d)All of these
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
In case of sale on approval, the ownership is transferred to the buyer when he:
a)
Accepts the goods
b)
Adopts the transaction
c)
Fails to return goods within the specified time
d)
All of these
|
Jayant Mishra answered |
TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP IN CASE OF SALE ON APPROVAL:
a) Goods sent on approval: - In case of sale on approval or sale on return, the buyer has an option to return the goods to the seller within a reasonable period of time. Thus, the ownership transferred to the buyer when he accepts the goods. If the buyer does not return the goods within the reasonable time, the seller can recover the price of the goods from the buyer.
In case of sale on approval, the ownership to the buyer is transferred in three ways:
1. When the goods are accepted by the buyer, or
2. When the buyer performs some acts which indicates implied acceptance of the buyer, or
3. The buyer fails to return the goods within a reasonable time
Under Section 24, when goods are sold under a contract of sale or return or on approval, the sale is a conditional sale. As a result of significance of the buyer’s approval, the goods will pass to the buyer.
If the buyer becomes insolvent after transfer of property in goods, but before getting possession of goods:- a)The Official Assignee will not be entitled to claim the goods and their possession from the seller
- b)The Official Assignee will be entitled to claim the goods but not their possession from the seller
- c)The Official Assignee will be entitled to claim the goods and their possession from the seller
- d)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
If the buyer becomes insolvent after transfer of property in goods, but before getting possession of goods:
a)
The Official Assignee will not be entitled to claim the goods and their possession from the seller
b)
The Official Assignee will be entitled to claim the goods but not their possession from the seller
c)
The Official Assignee will be entitled to claim the goods and their possession from the seller
d)
None of the above
|
|
Jayant Mishra answered |
The Official Receiver or Assignee can take the possession of of goods from seller only if the ownership of goods has been transferred to the buyer.
Delivery is the voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another. Delivery may be actual, constructive or symbolic. Actual or physical delivery takes place where the goods are handed over by the seller to the buyer or his agent authorized to take possession of the goods.
When the buyer and seller both reject the goods and the goods are in transit, then - a)It is deemed that the goods are still in transit.
- b)Transit is deemed to be ended.
- c)Carrier becomes the owner of the goods.
- d)None of these.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
When the buyer and seller both reject the goods and the goods are in transit, then
a)
It is deemed that the goods are still in transit.
b)
Transit is deemed to be ended.
c)
Carrier becomes the owner of the goods.
d)
None of these.
|
Ankita Deshmukh answered |
A
In sale the position of a buyer is that of : - a)Owner of the goods
- b)Bailee of the goods
- c)Hirer
- d)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
In sale the position of a buyer is that of :
a)
Owner of the goods
b)
Bailee of the goods
c)
Hirer
d)
None of the above
|
Akshay Das answered |
**Explanation:**
In the context of a sale, the position of a buyer is that of the owner of the goods. This means that once the buyer pays for the goods and takes possession of them, they become the legal owner of the goods.
**Ownership of Goods:**
- When a buyer purchases goods from a seller, ownership of the goods is transferred from the seller to the buyer.
- This transfer of ownership is a fundamental aspect of a sale transaction.
- Once the buyer becomes the owner of the goods, they have the right to use, sell, or dispose of the goods as they see fit.
**Rights and Responsibilities of the Owner:**
- As the owner of the goods, the buyer has certain rights and responsibilities.
- The buyer has the right to possess and use the goods for their own purposes.
- They also have the right to transfer ownership of the goods to another party through a subsequent sale.
- Additionally, the buyer is responsible for the care and maintenance of the goods to ensure their proper functioning and longevity.
**Distinction from Other Positions:**
a) **Owner of the Goods:**
- The buyer is the owner of the goods once the sale is completed.
- This means that they have full legal ownership and control over the goods.
- They can use, sell, or dispose of the goods as they see fit.
b) **Bailee of the Goods:**
- A bailee is a person who temporarily possesses goods belonging to someone else.
- In a sale transaction, the buyer does not act as a bailee but becomes the owner of the goods.
c) **Hire:**
- Hiring refers to the temporary use of goods or services in exchange for a fee.
- In a sale transaction, the buyer does not hire the goods but becomes the owner of them.
d) **None of the Above:**
- This option is incorrect as the correct position of a buyer in a sale transaction is that of the owner of the goods.
In conclusion, the correct answer is option 'A' as the buyer in a sale transaction becomes the owner of the goods. They have full legal ownership and control over the goods, and can use, sell, or dispose of them as they see fit.
In the context of a sale, the position of a buyer is that of the owner of the goods. This means that once the buyer pays for the goods and takes possession of them, they become the legal owner of the goods.
**Ownership of Goods:**
- When a buyer purchases goods from a seller, ownership of the goods is transferred from the seller to the buyer.
- This transfer of ownership is a fundamental aspect of a sale transaction.
- Once the buyer becomes the owner of the goods, they have the right to use, sell, or dispose of the goods as they see fit.
**Rights and Responsibilities of the Owner:**
- As the owner of the goods, the buyer has certain rights and responsibilities.
- The buyer has the right to possess and use the goods for their own purposes.
- They also have the right to transfer ownership of the goods to another party through a subsequent sale.
- Additionally, the buyer is responsible for the care and maintenance of the goods to ensure their proper functioning and longevity.
**Distinction from Other Positions:**
a) **Owner of the Goods:**
- The buyer is the owner of the goods once the sale is completed.
- This means that they have full legal ownership and control over the goods.
- They can use, sell, or dispose of the goods as they see fit.
b) **Bailee of the Goods:**
- A bailee is a person who temporarily possesses goods belonging to someone else.
- In a sale transaction, the buyer does not act as a bailee but becomes the owner of the goods.
c) **Hire:**
- Hiring refers to the temporary use of goods or services in exchange for a fee.
- In a sale transaction, the buyer does not hire the goods but becomes the owner of them.
d) **None of the Above:**
- This option is incorrect as the correct position of a buyer in a sale transaction is that of the owner of the goods.
In conclusion, the correct answer is option 'A' as the buyer in a sale transaction becomes the owner of the goods. They have full legal ownership and control over the goods, and can use, sell, or dispose of them as they see fit.
A gives a gold chain to B on sale or return basis and B gives it to C on sale or return basis. C loses the gold chain. Who shall bear the loss?- a)A, the real owner
- b)B
- c)C
- d)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
A gives a gold chain to B on sale or return basis and B gives it to C on sale or return basis. C loses the gold chain. Who shall bear the loss?
a)
A, the real owner
b)
B
c)
C
d)
None of the above
|
Sandeep Singh Virdi answered |
A gave the chain to B for sale or return. They came into a contract. As there contract is not completed and B handed over the chain to C. So the second contract is void till the first one completed. Thats why B is liable for the loss.
Where the buyer wrongfully neglects or refuses to accept and pay for the goods, he will have to compensate the seller in a suit by him for: - a)Damages for non-acceptance
- b)Price for non-acceptance
- c)(a) and (b)
- d)None
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Where the buyer wrongfully neglects or refuses to accept and pay for the goods, he will have to compensate the seller in a suit by him for:
a)
Damages for non-acceptance
b)
Price for non-acceptance
c)
(a) and (b)
d)
None
|
Srsps answered |
- When a buyer wrongfully refuses to accept and pay for goods, the seller can claim compensation.
- The correct claim is "Damages for non-acceptance," which covers the loss or damage suffered due to the buyer's breach.
- The seller is entitled to recover the difference between the contract price and the market price at the time of breach.
- The "Price for non-acceptance" typically refers to the full contract price, which isn't applicable here unless the goods can't be resold.
- The correct claim is "Damages for non-acceptance," which covers the loss or damage suffered due to the buyer's breach.
- The seller is entitled to recover the difference between the contract price and the market price at the time of breach.
- The "Price for non-acceptance" typically refers to the full contract price, which isn't applicable here unless the goods can't be resold.
Reservation of Right to disposal is available for which kind of goods?- a)Specific goods
- b)Existing goods
- c)Unascertained goods
- d)All of these
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Reservation of Right to disposal is available for which kind of goods?
a)
Specific goods
b)
Existing goods
c)
Unascertained goods
d)
All of these
|
Rajat Patel answered |
Specific goods are goods specifically identified at the time a contract of sale is made, e.g. a shirt made of cotton and with a Mickey Mouse cartoon on it. If the good is not so identified, the contract is for the sale of unascertained goods.
A sold a bicycle costing Rs. 1,000 to B. B paid Rs. 500 and after some time A insisted B to take delivery. In the meantime bicycle is lost. Who bears the risk?- a)A
- b)B
- c)Both
- d)None
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
A sold a bicycle costing Rs. 1,000 to B. B paid Rs. 500 and after some time A insisted B to take delivery. In the meantime bicycle is lost. Who bears the risk?
a)
A
b)
B
c)
Both
d)
None
|
|
Akshay Das answered |
The correct answer is option 'B', which means B bears the risk in this situation. Let's analyze why B bears the risk in detail.
When A sold the bicycle to B, it was agreed upon that B would pay Rs. 500 and take delivery of the bicycle at a later time. This means that the ownership and risk of the bicycle would be transferred to B once the payment is made. However, in this case, B has only paid Rs. 500 and has not taken delivery of the bicycle yet.
Now, if the bicycle is lost during the period between the payment and the delivery, B bears the risk because the ownership of the bicycle has already been transferred to B. A has fulfilled their part of the agreement by selling the bicycle to B and receiving partial payment. Since B has not taken delivery of the bicycle, it is B's responsibility to bear the risk of any loss or damage that occurs during this period.
To further clarify this, let's consider the principles of risk and ownership in a sale agreement:
1. Transfer of Ownership: When A sold the bicycle to B, the ownership of the bicycle was transferred from A to B. This means that B becomes the legal owner of the bicycle once the sale agreement is made, regardless of whether B has taken delivery or not.
2. Risk of Loss: The risk of loss or damage to the bicycle is generally transferred along with the ownership. In this case, since the ownership of the bicycle has been transferred to B, the risk of loss also transfers to B.
3. Delivery: Taking delivery of the bicycle is a separate action from the transfer of ownership. It is the responsibility of B to take delivery of the bicycle within a reasonable time after making the payment. Until B takes delivery, the risk of loss or damage remains with B.
Based on these principles, it is clear that B bears the risk in this situation because the ownership of the bicycle has already been transferred to B, even though B has not taken delivery yet. Therefore, option 'B' is the correct answer.
When A sold the bicycle to B, it was agreed upon that B would pay Rs. 500 and take delivery of the bicycle at a later time. This means that the ownership and risk of the bicycle would be transferred to B once the payment is made. However, in this case, B has only paid Rs. 500 and has not taken delivery of the bicycle yet.
Now, if the bicycle is lost during the period between the payment and the delivery, B bears the risk because the ownership of the bicycle has already been transferred to B. A has fulfilled their part of the agreement by selling the bicycle to B and receiving partial payment. Since B has not taken delivery of the bicycle, it is B's responsibility to bear the risk of any loss or damage that occurs during this period.
To further clarify this, let's consider the principles of risk and ownership in a sale agreement:
1. Transfer of Ownership: When A sold the bicycle to B, the ownership of the bicycle was transferred from A to B. This means that B becomes the legal owner of the bicycle once the sale agreement is made, regardless of whether B has taken delivery or not.
2. Risk of Loss: The risk of loss or damage to the bicycle is generally transferred along with the ownership. In this case, since the ownership of the bicycle has been transferred to B, the risk of loss also transfers to B.
3. Delivery: Taking delivery of the bicycle is a separate action from the transfer of ownership. It is the responsibility of B to take delivery of the bicycle within a reasonable time after making the payment. Until B takes delivery, the risk of loss or damage remains with B.
Based on these principles, it is clear that B bears the risk in this situation because the ownership of the bicycle has already been transferred to B, even though B has not taken delivery yet. Therefore, option 'B' is the correct answer.
Where goods are sold by a person who is not the owner thereof and who does not sell them under the authority or with the consent of the owner, the buyer acquires no better title to the goods than the seller had. This is known as: - a)Caveat Emptor
- b)Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet
- c)Risk prima facie passes
- d)None of these
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Where goods are sold by a person who is not the owner thereof and who does not sell them under the authority or with the consent of the owner, the buyer acquires no better title to the goods than the seller had. This is known as:
a)
Caveat Emptor
b)
Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet
c)
Risk prima facie passes
d)
None of these
|
|
Srsps answered |
- The correct answer is B: Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet.
- This Latin phrase means "no one gives what they do not have."
- It indicates that a seller cannot transfer a better title to goods than they themselves possess.
- If a non-owner sells goods without the owner's consent, the buyer cannot obtain ownership rights.
- This principle protects property rights, ensuring only rightful owners or authorized sellers can convey full title.
- This Latin phrase means "no one gives what they do not have."
- It indicates that a seller cannot transfer a better title to goods than they themselves possess.
- If a non-owner sells goods without the owner's consent, the buyer cannot obtain ownership rights.
- This principle protects property rights, ensuring only rightful owners or authorized sellers can convey full title.
When the dale is made, goods should be: - a)Delivered to sellers place
- b)Delivered to the place of the buyer
- c)Only placed at the disposal of the buyer
- d)None
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
When the dale is made, goods should be:
a)
Delivered to sellers place
b)
Delivered to the place of the buyer
c)
Only placed at the disposal of the buyer
d)
None
|
Maheshwar Goyal answered |
**Explanation:**
In commercial transactions, the delivery of goods is an important aspect that determines the transfer of ownership and possession from the seller to the buyer. The delivery is usually governed by the terms and conditions of the contract or agreement between the parties involved.
The question specifically asks about the delivery of goods when the dale is made. The correct answer is option 'C' - the goods should only be placed at the disposal of the buyer. This means that the seller is responsible for making the goods available for the buyer to collect or take possession of them.
Let's break down the answer in detail:
1. **Delivery of goods**:
- Delivery refers to the physical transfer or handover of goods from the seller to the buyer.
- It is an important step in completing a sales transaction and transferring ownership of the goods.
2. **Options mentioned**:
- Option 'a' states that the goods should be delivered to the seller's place. This is not correct as the goods should be delivered to the buyer, not the seller.
- Option 'b' states that the goods should be delivered to the place of the buyer. This is also incorrect as it implies physical delivery to the buyer's location.
- Option 'c' states that the goods should only be placed at the disposal of the buyer. This is the correct answer as it signifies that the seller has fulfilled their obligation by making the goods available for the buyer to collect or take possession of them.
3. **Placing goods at the disposal of the buyer**:
- When goods are placed at the disposal of the buyer, it means that the seller has fulfilled their responsibility of making the goods available for the buyer to collect or take possession of them.
- This can be done by storing the goods in a designated location or providing the buyer with information on where and how to collect the goods.
- The buyer then has the option to arrange for the transportation or collection of the goods at their convenience.
In conclusion, when the dale is made, the correct practice is to place the goods at the disposal of the buyer. This means that the seller has fulfilled their obligation and the buyer can collect or take possession of the goods.
In commercial transactions, the delivery of goods is an important aspect that determines the transfer of ownership and possession from the seller to the buyer. The delivery is usually governed by the terms and conditions of the contract or agreement between the parties involved.
The question specifically asks about the delivery of goods when the dale is made. The correct answer is option 'C' - the goods should only be placed at the disposal of the buyer. This means that the seller is responsible for making the goods available for the buyer to collect or take possession of them.
Let's break down the answer in detail:
1. **Delivery of goods**:
- Delivery refers to the physical transfer or handover of goods from the seller to the buyer.
- It is an important step in completing a sales transaction and transferring ownership of the goods.
2. **Options mentioned**:
- Option 'a' states that the goods should be delivered to the seller's place. This is not correct as the goods should be delivered to the buyer, not the seller.
- Option 'b' states that the goods should be delivered to the place of the buyer. This is also incorrect as it implies physical delivery to the buyer's location.
- Option 'c' states that the goods should only be placed at the disposal of the buyer. This is the correct answer as it signifies that the seller has fulfilled their obligation by making the goods available for the buyer to collect or take possession of them.
3. **Placing goods at the disposal of the buyer**:
- When goods are placed at the disposal of the buyer, it means that the seller has fulfilled their responsibility of making the goods available for the buyer to collect or take possession of them.
- This can be done by storing the goods in a designated location or providing the buyer with information on where and how to collect the goods.
- The buyer then has the option to arrange for the transportation or collection of the goods at their convenience.
In conclusion, when the dale is made, the correct practice is to place the goods at the disposal of the buyer. This means that the seller has fulfilled their obligation and the buyer can collect or take possession of the goods.
If the seller refuses to take away the goods, the buyer becomes: - a)Bailer of goods
- b)Bailee of goods
- c)Owner of goods
- d)Dealer of goods
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
If the seller refuses to take away the goods, the buyer becomes:
a)
Bailer of goods
b)
Bailee of goods
c)
Owner of goods
d)
Dealer of goods
|
Sai Joshi answered |
Explanation:
When the seller refuses to take away the goods, the buyer becomes the bailee of the goods. This means that the buyer now has temporary possession and control of the goods, but does not have legal ownership of the goods.
Definition of a Bailee:
A bailee is a person who is entrusted with the possession of goods by another person, known as the bailor, for a specific purpose. The bailee has a duty to take reasonable care of the goods and return them to the bailor once the purpose of the bailment has been fulfilled.
Reasoning:
In this scenario, the seller refuses to take away the goods, indicating that they do not want to retain possession of the goods. As a result, the buyer, who was originally the bailor, now becomes the bailee of the goods.
Implications:
1. Responsibility: As the bailee, the buyer is now responsible for the safekeeping and proper care of the goods. They must take reasonable measures to ensure that the goods are not damaged or lost during the period of bailment.
2. Return of Goods: The buyer must also be prepared to return the goods to the seller when requested. The buyer does not have the right to keep the goods indefinitely but must return them once the seller agrees to take them away.
3. Compensation: If the goods are damaged or lost while in the possession of the buyer, they may be held liable for compensation to the seller. The buyer may need to reimburse the seller for any loss or damage incurred.
Conclusion:
When the seller refuses to take away the goods, the buyer becomes the bailee of the goods. This means that the buyer has temporary possession and control of the goods, with the responsibility of taking care of them and returning them to the seller when requested.
When the seller refuses to take away the goods, the buyer becomes the bailee of the goods. This means that the buyer now has temporary possession and control of the goods, but does not have legal ownership of the goods.
Definition of a Bailee:
A bailee is a person who is entrusted with the possession of goods by another person, known as the bailor, for a specific purpose. The bailee has a duty to take reasonable care of the goods and return them to the bailor once the purpose of the bailment has been fulfilled.
Reasoning:
In this scenario, the seller refuses to take away the goods, indicating that they do not want to retain possession of the goods. As a result, the buyer, who was originally the bailor, now becomes the bailee of the goods.
Implications:
1. Responsibility: As the bailee, the buyer is now responsible for the safekeeping and proper care of the goods. They must take reasonable measures to ensure that the goods are not damaged or lost during the period of bailment.
2. Return of Goods: The buyer must also be prepared to return the goods to the seller when requested. The buyer does not have the right to keep the goods indefinitely but must return them once the seller agrees to take them away.
3. Compensation: If the goods are damaged or lost while in the possession of the buyer, they may be held liable for compensation to the seller. The buyer may need to reimburse the seller for any loss or damage incurred.
Conclusion:
When the seller refuses to take away the goods, the buyer becomes the bailee of the goods. This means that the buyer has temporary possession and control of the goods, with the responsibility of taking care of them and returning them to the seller when requested.
Nemo date quod non habet means : - a)A bonafide purchaser is always protected in law
- b)A finder of goods has the rights of a bailee
- c)No one can pass a better title than he himself has
- d)No one is above law
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Nemo date quod non habet means :
a)
A bonafide purchaser is always protected in law
b)
A finder of goods has the rights of a bailee
c)
No one can pass a better title than he himself has
d)
No one is above law
|
|
Jayant Mishra answered |
The first of this principle is enshrined in the Latin maxim, nemo dat quod non habet, which literally means no one can give what they do not have. In the context of sale of goods it means no one can transfer a better title than he himself has. ... Buyer gets no title when sale is by a person not the owner.
X agrees to sell to Y 100 bags of salt which are in godown. Before the date of delivery, the godown gets flooded salt were destroyed. Does Y has any rights against X?- a)No
- b)Y can claim the amount
- c)Y has the right to claim the goods
- d)None
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
X agrees to sell to Y 100 bags of salt which are in godown. Before the date of delivery, the godown gets flooded salt were destroyed. Does Y has any rights against X?
a)
No
b)
Y can claim the amount
c)
Y has the right to claim the goods
d)
None
|
|
Nilanjan Saha answered |
The correct answer is option 'A' - No.
Explanation:
When X agrees to sell 100 bags of salt to Y, there is a contract formed between them. However, before the date of delivery, the godown where the salt is stored gets flooded and the salt is destroyed. In this situation, Y does not have any rights against X for the following reasons:
1. Doctrine of Frustration: The doctrine of frustration applies when an event occurs after the formation of a contract, which makes it impossible to perform the contract. In this case, the flooding of the godown and the destruction of the salt can be considered as a frustrating event. As a result, the contract between X and Y is discharged, and both parties are released from their obligations under the contract.
2. Destruction of Subject Matter: The salt, which is the subject matter of the contract, has been destroyed due to the flooding. When the subject matter of the contract is destroyed without the fault of either party, the contract becomes impossible to perform. In such cases, the contract is considered frustrated, and the parties are not held liable for non-performance.
3. No Breach of Contract: Y cannot claim any rights against X because X has not breached the contract. The flooding and destruction of the salt were beyond X's control and were not caused by any fault or negligence on X's part. Therefore, X cannot be held responsible for the non-delivery of the salt.
4. No Remedies Available: Since the contract is frustrated, Y cannot claim any remedies such as damages or specific performance from X. The law recognizes that in cases of frustration, it is fair to release both parties from their obligations because the unforeseen event has made the performance of the contract impossible.
In conclusion, Y does not have any rights against X in this situation because the contract between them is frustrated due to the flooding and destruction of the salt. X cannot be held liable for the non-delivery of the salt, and Y cannot claim any remedies under the contract.
Explanation:
When X agrees to sell 100 bags of salt to Y, there is a contract formed between them. However, before the date of delivery, the godown where the salt is stored gets flooded and the salt is destroyed. In this situation, Y does not have any rights against X for the following reasons:
1. Doctrine of Frustration: The doctrine of frustration applies when an event occurs after the formation of a contract, which makes it impossible to perform the contract. In this case, the flooding of the godown and the destruction of the salt can be considered as a frustrating event. As a result, the contract between X and Y is discharged, and both parties are released from their obligations under the contract.
2. Destruction of Subject Matter: The salt, which is the subject matter of the contract, has been destroyed due to the flooding. When the subject matter of the contract is destroyed without the fault of either party, the contract becomes impossible to perform. In such cases, the contract is considered frustrated, and the parties are not held liable for non-performance.
3. No Breach of Contract: Y cannot claim any rights against X because X has not breached the contract. The flooding and destruction of the salt were beyond X's control and were not caused by any fault or negligence on X's part. Therefore, X cannot be held responsible for the non-delivery of the salt.
4. No Remedies Available: Since the contract is frustrated, Y cannot claim any remedies such as damages or specific performance from X. The law recognizes that in cases of frustration, it is fair to release both parties from their obligations because the unforeseen event has made the performance of the contract impossible.
In conclusion, Y does not have any rights against X in this situation because the contract between them is frustrated due to the flooding and destruction of the salt. X cannot be held liable for the non-delivery of the salt, and Y cannot claim any remedies under the contract.
X purchased a DVD at a public auction. Neither Auctioneer nor X knew at that time that the DVD was a stolen property. In such case, true owner can: - a)Recover the goods from X
- b)Sue the Auctioneer for fraud
- c)Both (a) and (b)
- d)Either (a) or (b)
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
X purchased a DVD at a public auction. Neither Auctioneer nor X knew at that time that the DVD was a stolen property. In such case, true owner can:
a)
Recover the goods from X
b)
Sue the Auctioneer for fraud
c)
Both (a) and (b)
d)
Either (a) or (b)
|
|
Ipsita Rane answered |
Explanation:
In this scenario, where X purchased a DVD at a public auction without knowing that it was stolen, the true owner can recover the goods from X. This is because the true owner retains the right to reclaim stolen property, regardless of whether the person in possession of the stolen property (X) was aware of its stolen status or not.
To further elaborate, let's break down the legal principles involved:
1. Ownership and Right to Possession:
The true owner of any property holds the legal title and has the right to possess it. This right continues even if the property is stolen or wrongfully taken from the true owner.
2. Voidable Title:
When a thief steals property and sells it to an innocent buyer, the buyer obtains what is called a "voidable title." This means that the buyer's ownership of the stolen property is legally valid unless and until the true owner exercises their right to reclaim it.
3. Right of Recovery:
The true owner has the right to recover their stolen property from anyone who possesses it, including innocent purchasers like X. The law prioritizes protecting the true owner's rights over the rights of those who innocently acquired the stolen property.
4. Auctioneer's Liability:
In this scenario, the auctioneer cannot be held liable for fraud because neither the auctioneer nor X had knowledge that the DVD was stolen. The auctioneer acted as a mere seller of the goods and did not engage in any fraudulent or deceptive conduct.
Therefore, the correct answer is option 'A' - the true owner can recover the goods from X. This is based on the principle that the true owner retains the right to reclaim stolen property, even from innocent buyers, as their ownership rights take precedence over the rights of innocent purchasers.
In this scenario, where X purchased a DVD at a public auction without knowing that it was stolen, the true owner can recover the goods from X. This is because the true owner retains the right to reclaim stolen property, regardless of whether the person in possession of the stolen property (X) was aware of its stolen status or not.
To further elaborate, let's break down the legal principles involved:
1. Ownership and Right to Possession:
The true owner of any property holds the legal title and has the right to possess it. This right continues even if the property is stolen or wrongfully taken from the true owner.
2. Voidable Title:
When a thief steals property and sells it to an innocent buyer, the buyer obtains what is called a "voidable title." This means that the buyer's ownership of the stolen property is legally valid unless and until the true owner exercises their right to reclaim it.
3. Right of Recovery:
The true owner has the right to recover their stolen property from anyone who possesses it, including innocent purchasers like X. The law prioritizes protecting the true owner's rights over the rights of those who innocently acquired the stolen property.
4. Auctioneer's Liability:
In this scenario, the auctioneer cannot be held liable for fraud because neither the auctioneer nor X had knowledge that the DVD was stolen. The auctioneer acted as a mere seller of the goods and did not engage in any fraudulent or deceptive conduct.
Therefore, the correct answer is option 'A' - the true owner can recover the goods from X. This is based on the principle that the true owner retains the right to reclaim stolen property, even from innocent buyers, as their ownership rights take precedence over the rights of innocent purchasers.
Delivery of goods to the carrier for the purpose of transmission to the buyer automatically means that the property in goods vest in the buyer:- a)True
- b)Partly true
- c)False
- d)Partly false
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Delivery of goods to the carrier for the purpose of transmission to the buyer automatically means that the property in goods vest in the buyer:
a)
True
b)
Partly true
c)
False
d)
Partly false
|
|
Arnab Nambiar answered |
The correct answer is option 'C' - False.
Explanation:
When goods are delivered to the carrier for transmission to the buyer, it does not automatically mean that the property in the goods vests in the buyer. The transfer of property in goods is governed by the Sale of Goods Act, which provides specific rules for the transfer of ownership.
According to the Sale of Goods Act, property in goods can be transferred from the seller to the buyer in three ways: by agreement, by intention of the parties, or by operation of law.
Agreement: Property in goods can be transferred by agreement between the seller and the buyer. They can agree on the transfer of ownership at a specific point in time, such as upon delivery or upon payment.
Intention of the parties: Property in goods can also be transferred based on the intention of the parties. Even if the goods are in the possession of the carrier, if the parties intend for the property to pass to the buyer at the time of delivery to the carrier, then the ownership will transfer accordingly.
Operation of law: There are certain situations where property in goods is transferred by operation of law. For example, if there is an unconditional contract for the sale of specific goods in a deliverable state, and the seller is in a position to deliver the goods to the buyer, then the property in the goods passes to the buyer when the contract is made.
In the given statement, it is mentioned that the delivery of goods to the carrier automatically means that the property in goods vests in the buyer. This statement is not true because the transfer of property in goods depends on the agreement and intention of the parties or the operation of law. Mere delivery of goods to the carrier does not automatically transfer ownership to the buyer.
Therefore, the correct answer is option 'C' - False.
Explanation:
When goods are delivered to the carrier for transmission to the buyer, it does not automatically mean that the property in the goods vests in the buyer. The transfer of property in goods is governed by the Sale of Goods Act, which provides specific rules for the transfer of ownership.
According to the Sale of Goods Act, property in goods can be transferred from the seller to the buyer in three ways: by agreement, by intention of the parties, or by operation of law.
Agreement: Property in goods can be transferred by agreement between the seller and the buyer. They can agree on the transfer of ownership at a specific point in time, such as upon delivery or upon payment.
Intention of the parties: Property in goods can also be transferred based on the intention of the parties. Even if the goods are in the possession of the carrier, if the parties intend for the property to pass to the buyer at the time of delivery to the carrier, then the ownership will transfer accordingly.
Operation of law: There are certain situations where property in goods is transferred by operation of law. For example, if there is an unconditional contract for the sale of specific goods in a deliverable state, and the seller is in a position to deliver the goods to the buyer, then the property in the goods passes to the buyer when the contract is made.
In the given statement, it is mentioned that the delivery of goods to the carrier automatically means that the property in goods vests in the buyer. This statement is not true because the transfer of property in goods depends on the agreement and intention of the parties or the operation of law. Mere delivery of goods to the carrier does not automatically transfer ownership to the buyer.
Therefore, the correct answer is option 'C' - False.
A of Mumbai writes to B of Delhi to send him a book by post parcel. The parcel is lost on the way. Can B recover the price?- a)No, delivery to post office is not a delivery to buyer
- b)Yes, delivery to post office is delivery to buyer
- c)No, B has not got the book
- d)None
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
A of Mumbai writes to B of Delhi to send him a book by post parcel. The parcel is lost on the way. Can B recover the price?
a)
No, delivery to post office is not a delivery to buyer
b)
Yes, delivery to post office is delivery to buyer
c)
No, B has not got the book
d)
None
|
|
Harshad Kapoor answered |
Answer:
Background:
In this scenario, A of Mumbai writes to B of Delhi requesting B to send him a book by post parcel. However, the parcel gets lost in transit. The question asks whether B can recover the price of the book.
Analysis:
To determine whether B can recover the price, we need to consider the legal implications of the delivery and ownership of the book. The key factors to consider are:
- Delivery to Post Office: In this case, B has delivered the book to the post office as requested by A. This can be considered as a delivery to the buyer, A, because the post office is acting as an agent of the buyer for the purpose of delivery.
- Loss of Parcel: The parcel gets lost on the way, which means A never receives the book.
Explanation:
According to the principles of contract law, the general rule is that the risk of loss or damage to goods passes from the seller to the buyer upon delivery. In this case, the delivery to the post office can be considered as a delivery to the buyer, A. Therefore, the risk of loss passes to A upon delivery to the post office.
Since the parcel is lost in transit, it can be argued that A has not received the book. However, this does not affect the fact that the delivery was made to the buyer through the post office. Therefore, B has fulfilled their obligation of delivering the book, and A is considered to have received the book.
As a result, B can recover the price of the book from A. The loss of the parcel does not absolve A from their obligation to pay for the book, as the risk of loss had already passed to A upon delivery to the post office.
Conclusion:
Based on the analysis of the delivery and ownership of the book, B can recover the price of the book from A. The loss of the parcel does not affect the fact that the delivery was made to the buyer through the post office, and therefore, A is still obligated to pay for the book.
A finder of goods has the power to sell the goods and to give good title to the buyer, if the owner of goods cannot be found with: - a)Ordinary Diligence
- b)Reasonable diligence
- c)Due diligence
- d)Lack of diligence
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
A finder of goods has the power to sell the goods and to give good title to the buyer, if the owner of goods cannot be found with:
a)
Ordinary Diligence
b)
Reasonable diligence
c)
Due diligence
d)
Lack of diligence
|
Poonam Reddy answered |
A Finder of goods has the power to sell the goods to give good title to the Buyer, if the owner of goods cannot be found with reasonable diligence. Reasonable diligence refers to the due diligence. It refers to he care expected from a logical and reasonable person.
There was a contract to supply waste coal and ash for the next six months, as and when the waste is generated by the seller’s factory.The buyer paid the lump sum price for the next six months in advance. When does the property in the goods pass to the buyer?- a)After the lapse of six months period
- b)At the time of entering into the contract
- c)At the time of paying advance money
- d)As and when factory discharges waste
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
There was a contract to supply waste coal and ash for the next six months, as and when the waste is generated by the seller’s factory.The buyer paid the lump sum price for the next six months in advance. When does the property in the goods pass to the buyer?
a)
After the lapse of six months period
b)
At the time of entering into the contract
c)
At the time of paying advance money
d)
As and when factory discharges waste
|
Suvi answered |
As u can see in question there was a contract to supply waste ash and coal generated by the factory so the answer is in the question it self that the property will be passes to the buyer as and when factory discharges the waste.
hope u get it
Thankyou
hope u get it
Thankyou
A sells certain goods to B. After the contract of sale but before the goods were delivered to B, the goods were taken by the Government for its own use. Here the seller is:- a)A
- b)B
- c)Both
- d)None
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
A sells certain goods to B. After the contract of sale but before the goods were delivered to B, the goods were taken by the Government for its own use. Here the seller is:
a)
A
b)
B
c)
Both
d)
None
|
Megha Sharma answered |
Option A is the correct ans
because good has not be yet delivered to buyer no contract will be formed
because good has not be yet delivered to buyer no contract will be formed
If goods were delivered to buyer and after the delivery, the goods were destroyed, then who will suffer the loss?- a)Buyer
- b)Seller
- c)Both the buyer and seller
- d)None of these
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
If goods were delivered to buyer and after the delivery, the goods were destroyed, then who will suffer the loss?
a)
Buyer
b)
Seller
c)
Both the buyer and seller
d)
None of these
|
彡qʋʌňτʋɱ彡vɩsʜʌɭ Sphinx answered |
When goods delivered to buyer the ownership /property of goods transferred to owner means buyer . ACCORDING TO THE SEC 26 OF SALE OF GOOD ACT 1930 states that RISK FOLLOW OWNERSHIP.
Finder of Goods can sue the true owner of the goods for the : - a)Expenses incurred in finding the true owner.
- b)Expenses incurred in preserving the goods.
- c)Reward announced by the owner if he had the knowledge of the reward.
- d)All of the above.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Finder of Goods can sue the true owner of the goods for the :
a)
Expenses incurred in finding the true owner.
b)
Expenses incurred in preserving the goods.
c)
Reward announced by the owner if he had the knowledge of the reward.
d)
All of the above.
|
|
Rajat Patel answered |
The term “contract “ is defined in section 2(h) of Indian Contract Act ,1872 , as :
An agreement enforceable by law is a contract:
Thus for the formation of a contract there must be –
An agreement , and
The agreement should be enforceable by law.
Thus section 168 – 169, of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 talks about the rights and duties of a finder of any lost goods.
POSITION OF FINDER OF GOODS
According to section 71, a person who find goods belonging to another and takes them into his custody, is subject to the same responsibility as a bailee. Since the position of the finder of the goods is that of a bailee he is supposed to take the same amount of care with regard to the goods as is expected of a bailee under section 151. He is also subject to all the duties of a bailee, including a duty to return the goods after the true owner is found. If he refuses to return, he could be made liable for conversion.
RIGHTS OF FINDER OF GOODS
Section 168 and 169 confer certain rights on the finder of goods.
SECTION 168 – MAY SUE FOR SPECIFIC REWARD OFFERED :
The finder of goods has no right to sue the owner for compensation for trouble and expense voluntarily incurred by him to preserve the goods and to find out the owner, but he may retain the goods against the owner until he receives such compensation, and where the owner has offered a specific reward for the return of goods lost, the finder may sue for such reward, and may retain the goods until he receives it.
RIGHT OF LIEN
According to section 168, a finder of goods has no right to sue the owner for trouble and expenses voluntarily incurred by him to preserve the goods and to find the owner. He has, however, the right of particular lien in respect of those goods. He may retain the goods against the owner until he receives compensation for trouble and expense voluntarily incurred by him to preserve the goods and to find the owner
RIGHT OF CLAIMING THE REWARD, IF ANNOUNCED BY THE OWNER
It has been noted above that the finder has the right to retain the goods until he Is paid compensation for trouble and expense voluntarily incurred by him to preserve the goods and find the owner. In addition to that, where the owner has offered a specific reward for the return of goods lost the finder may sue for such reward and also may retain the goods until he receives it.
If the goods have already been found voluntarily, and then the owner of the goods promises to compensate the finder for his past voluntary services, the contract is binding and the owner is bound to pay the promised amount.
SECTION 169 – WHEN FINDER OF THING COMMONLY ON SALE MAY SELL IT:
When a thing which is commonly the subject of sale is lost, if the owner cannot with reasonable diligence be found, or if he refuses upon demand, to pay the lawful charge of the finder, finder may sell it –
When the thing is in danger of perishing or losing the greater part of its value,
When the lawful charge of the finder, in respect of the thing found amount to two-third of its value,
RIGHT TO SELL THE GOODS FOUND (SEC.169)
The finder of the goods has also been given the right to sell the goods found by him under certain circumstances mentioned in section 169. Such a right is available to the finder of the lost goods when the following conditions are satisfied:
If the owner of the goods cannot be found; or if he refuses to pay the lawful charges of the finder, and
When the good is in danger of perishing its value; or when the lawful charges of the founder in respect of the thing found amount to two-third of its value.
A contract for sale of goods to be delivered at a future date shall be _______even if the seller has got the goods in present possession: - a)Invalid
- b)Illegal
- c)Valid
- d)Voidable at the option of the buyer
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
A contract for sale of goods to be delivered at a future date shall be _______even if the seller has got the goods in present possession:
a)
Invalid
b)
Illegal
c)
Valid
d)
Voidable at the option of the buyer
|
|
Maheshwar Goyal answered |
**Valid Contract for Sale of Goods**
A contract for the sale of goods to be delivered at a future date is considered valid, even if the seller already has possession of the goods. This means that the contract is legally enforceable and both parties are obligated to fulfill their respective obligations under the contract.
**Explanation:**
1. **Definition of a Contract:** A contract is an agreement between two or more parties that creates legally binding obligations. In the case of a sale of goods, a contract is formed when the buyer and seller agree on the essential terms of the sale, such as the price, quantity, delivery date, and any other relevant details.
2. **Future Delivery of Goods:** In some cases, the parties may agree that the delivery of the goods will occur at a future date, even if the seller already has possession of the goods. This could be due to various reasons, such as the need for additional time to prepare the goods for delivery or to accommodate the buyer's schedule.
3. **Transfer of Ownership and Risk:** In a contract for the sale of goods, the ownership and risk of the goods generally pass from the seller to the buyer at the time of delivery. However, even if the seller has possession of the goods at the time of the contract, the parties can agree that ownership and risk will transfer at a future date specified in the contract. This does not invalidate the contract.
4. **Enforceability of the Contract:** A contract for the sale of goods to be delivered at a future date is still considered valid and enforceable because it meets the necessary requirements for a contract. These requirements include an offer, acceptance, consideration, and an intention to create legal relations. As long as these elements are present, the contract is legally binding.
5. **Performance of the Contract:** Once the contract is formed, both parties are obligated to fulfill their respective obligations. The seller must deliver the goods in accordance with the terms of the contract, and the buyer must accept and pay for the goods as agreed. If either party fails to perform their obligations, the other party may have legal remedies available to them, such as seeking damages or specific performance.
In conclusion, a contract for the sale of goods to be delivered at a future date is considered valid, even if the seller already has possession of the goods. This is because the contract meets the necessary requirements for a valid contract and creates legally binding obligations for both parties.
A contract for the sale of goods to be delivered at a future date is considered valid, even if the seller already has possession of the goods. This means that the contract is legally enforceable and both parties are obligated to fulfill their respective obligations under the contract.
**Explanation:**
1. **Definition of a Contract:** A contract is an agreement between two or more parties that creates legally binding obligations. In the case of a sale of goods, a contract is formed when the buyer and seller agree on the essential terms of the sale, such as the price, quantity, delivery date, and any other relevant details.
2. **Future Delivery of Goods:** In some cases, the parties may agree that the delivery of the goods will occur at a future date, even if the seller already has possession of the goods. This could be due to various reasons, such as the need for additional time to prepare the goods for delivery or to accommodate the buyer's schedule.
3. **Transfer of Ownership and Risk:** In a contract for the sale of goods, the ownership and risk of the goods generally pass from the seller to the buyer at the time of delivery. However, even if the seller has possession of the goods at the time of the contract, the parties can agree that ownership and risk will transfer at a future date specified in the contract. This does not invalidate the contract.
4. **Enforceability of the Contract:** A contract for the sale of goods to be delivered at a future date is still considered valid and enforceable because it meets the necessary requirements for a contract. These requirements include an offer, acceptance, consideration, and an intention to create legal relations. As long as these elements are present, the contract is legally binding.
5. **Performance of the Contract:** Once the contract is formed, both parties are obligated to fulfill their respective obligations. The seller must deliver the goods in accordance with the terms of the contract, and the buyer must accept and pay for the goods as agreed. If either party fails to perform their obligations, the other party may have legal remedies available to them, such as seeking damages or specific performance.
In conclusion, a contract for the sale of goods to be delivered at a future date is considered valid, even if the seller already has possession of the goods. This is because the contract meets the necessary requirements for a valid contract and creates legally binding obligations for both parties.
________means an act involving the selection and earmarking or separation of goods with the intention of using the goods in performance of contract of sale:- a)Appropriation of goods
- b)Ascertainment of goods
- c)Transfer of goods
- d)None
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
________means an act involving the selection and earmarking or separation of goods with the intention of using the goods in performance of contract of sale:
a)
Appropriation of goods
b)
Ascertainment of goods
c)
Transfer of goods
d)
None
|
Saumya Khanna answered |
Appropriation of goods
Appropriation of goods refers to the act of selecting and earmarking or separating goods with the intention of using them in the performance of a contract of sale. It is an important concept in the field of contract law and is closely related to the transfer of ownership and risk in a sale transaction.
Explanation:
When two parties enter into a contract of sale, it is necessary to determine which specific goods will be transferred from the seller to the buyer. This process is known as the appropriation of goods. The seller must clearly identify and set apart the goods that are intended to be transferred to the buyer.
Key Points:
Here are some key points to understand the concept of appropriation of goods:
1. Selection of Goods: The first step in the appropriation of goods is the selection of specific goods that will be transferred to the buyer. This selection can be based on various factors such as quantity, quality, and specifications.
2. Earmarking or Separation: Once the goods have been selected, they need to be earmarked or separated from the seller's stock. This is done to ensure that the selected goods are not mixed up with other goods and can be easily identified.
3. Intention: The act of appropriation requires the intention of using the selected goods in the performance of the contract of sale. Both the seller and the buyer must have a mutual understanding and agreement regarding the specific goods that will be transferred.
4. Transfer of Ownership and Risk: Appropriation of goods is closely related to the transfer of ownership and risk in a sale transaction. Once the goods have been appropriated, the ownership and risk associated with the goods are transferred from the seller to the buyer.
5. Legal Consequences: The act of appropriation has legal consequences. It establishes the rights and obligations of the parties involved in the contract of sale. It also determines the point at which the buyer becomes responsible for the goods and when the seller's liability ends.
In conclusion, appropriation of goods is an essential step in a contract of sale. It involves the selection and earmarking or separation of goods with the intention of using them in the performance of the contract. It is important for both the buyer and the seller to clearly understand and agree on the specific goods that will be transferred in order to avoid any confusion or disputes in the future.
Appropriation of goods refers to the act of selecting and earmarking or separating goods with the intention of using them in the performance of a contract of sale. It is an important concept in the field of contract law and is closely related to the transfer of ownership and risk in a sale transaction.
Explanation:
When two parties enter into a contract of sale, it is necessary to determine which specific goods will be transferred from the seller to the buyer. This process is known as the appropriation of goods. The seller must clearly identify and set apart the goods that are intended to be transferred to the buyer.
Key Points:
Here are some key points to understand the concept of appropriation of goods:
1. Selection of Goods: The first step in the appropriation of goods is the selection of specific goods that will be transferred to the buyer. This selection can be based on various factors such as quantity, quality, and specifications.
2. Earmarking or Separation: Once the goods have been selected, they need to be earmarked or separated from the seller's stock. This is done to ensure that the selected goods are not mixed up with other goods and can be easily identified.
3. Intention: The act of appropriation requires the intention of using the selected goods in the performance of the contract of sale. Both the seller and the buyer must have a mutual understanding and agreement regarding the specific goods that will be transferred.
4. Transfer of Ownership and Risk: Appropriation of goods is closely related to the transfer of ownership and risk in a sale transaction. Once the goods have been appropriated, the ownership and risk associated with the goods are transferred from the seller to the buyer.
5. Legal Consequences: The act of appropriation has legal consequences. It establishes the rights and obligations of the parties involved in the contract of sale. It also determines the point at which the buyer becomes responsible for the goods and when the seller's liability ends.
In conclusion, appropriation of goods is an essential step in a contract of sale. It involves the selection and earmarking or separation of goods with the intention of using them in the performance of the contract. It is important for both the buyer and the seller to clearly understand and agree on the specific goods that will be transferred in order to avoid any confusion or disputes in the future.
Ram of Mumbai order Bill of Delhi for the supply of certain goods. The station Master of Mumbai informs Ram about the arrival of goods but before Ram could take delivery, goods are destroyed. Can bill get the money of goods?- a)No-Ram has not taken the delivery
- b)No-Property is not transferred to Ram
- c)Yes-Property transferred to Ram
- d)None of these
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Ram of Mumbai order Bill of Delhi for the supply of certain goods. The station Master of Mumbai informs Ram about the arrival of goods but before Ram could take delivery, goods are destroyed. Can bill get the money of goods?
a)
No-Ram has not taken the delivery
b)
No-Property is not transferred to Ram
c)
Yes-Property transferred to Ram
d)
None of these
|
|
Saumya Khanna answered |
The correct answer is option 'C' - Yes, the property transferred to Ram.
Explanation:
- Ram of Mumbai ordered goods from Delhi, which means there was an agreement between Ram and the supplier in Delhi for the supply of certain goods.
- The station master of Mumbai informed Ram about the arrival of the goods, indicating that the goods have reached the destination.
- According to the Indian Sale of Goods Act, 1930, the property in the goods is transferred from the seller to the buyer when the parties intend it to be transferred.
- In this case, since the goods have arrived at the destination and Ram has been informed about it, it can be inferred that the parties intended the property in the goods to be transferred to Ram.
- The fact that the goods are destroyed before Ram could take the delivery does not affect the transfer of property.
- Once the property is transferred to Ram, he becomes the owner of the goods and is entitled to the benefits and risks associated with it.
- Therefore, Ram can claim the money for the goods from the supplier in Delhi as the property has been transferred to him.
Importance of Delivery:
- Delivery is an essential element in the transfer of property in goods.
- It signifies the voluntary transfer of possession from the seller to the buyer.
- However, in this case, even though Ram has not taken physical delivery of the goods, the property is still considered to be transferred to him.
Exceptions to Delivery:
- The Indian Sale of Goods Act provides certain exceptions to the rule of delivery. These exceptions include:
1. When there is an agreement between the buyer and the seller for the transfer of property at a future date or on the happening of a specific event.
2. When the goods are in a deliverable state, but the seller is required to do something to put them into a deliverable state.
3. When the goods are in the possession of a third party, who is holding them as bailee for the seller.
Conclusion:
- In this case, since the goods have arrived at the destination and Ram has been informed about it, the property in the goods is considered to be transferred to him.
- Therefore, Ram can claim the money for the goods from the supplier in Delhi.
Explanation:
- Ram of Mumbai ordered goods from Delhi, which means there was an agreement between Ram and the supplier in Delhi for the supply of certain goods.
- The station master of Mumbai informed Ram about the arrival of the goods, indicating that the goods have reached the destination.
- According to the Indian Sale of Goods Act, 1930, the property in the goods is transferred from the seller to the buyer when the parties intend it to be transferred.
- In this case, since the goods have arrived at the destination and Ram has been informed about it, it can be inferred that the parties intended the property in the goods to be transferred to Ram.
- The fact that the goods are destroyed before Ram could take the delivery does not affect the transfer of property.
- Once the property is transferred to Ram, he becomes the owner of the goods and is entitled to the benefits and risks associated with it.
- Therefore, Ram can claim the money for the goods from the supplier in Delhi as the property has been transferred to him.
Importance of Delivery:
- Delivery is an essential element in the transfer of property in goods.
- It signifies the voluntary transfer of possession from the seller to the buyer.
- However, in this case, even though Ram has not taken physical delivery of the goods, the property is still considered to be transferred to him.
Exceptions to Delivery:
- The Indian Sale of Goods Act provides certain exceptions to the rule of delivery. These exceptions include:
1. When there is an agreement between the buyer and the seller for the transfer of property at a future date or on the happening of a specific event.
2. When the goods are in a deliverable state, but the seller is required to do something to put them into a deliverable state.
3. When the goods are in the possession of a third party, who is holding them as bailee for the seller.
Conclusion:
- In this case, since the goods have arrived at the destination and Ram has been informed about it, the property in the goods is considered to be transferred to him.
- Therefore, Ram can claim the money for the goods from the supplier in Delhi.
As per the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 physical delivery of goods is not an essential element of contract of sale. This statement is_______.- a)True
- b)False
- c)Partly true
- d)Can’t say
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
As per the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 physical delivery of goods is not an essential element of contract of sale. This statement is_______.
a)
True
b)
False
c)
Partly true
d)
Can’t say
|
|
Jatin Mehta answered |
Be true or false, depending on the circumstances
S was shopping in a self service super market. He picked up a bottle of mange squash from a shop and while examining it the bottle exploded in his hand and injured him. Can S claim damages for the injury?- a)S cannot claim damages
- b)S can claim damages
- c)S has to pay price for the bottle
- d)None
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
S was shopping in a self service super market. He picked up a bottle of mange squash from a shop and while examining it the bottle exploded in his hand and injured him. Can S claim damages for the injury?
a)
S cannot claim damages
b)
S can claim damages
c)
S has to pay price for the bottle
d)
None
|
Jagadeep Sammeta answered |
Here he cannot claim damages because there is no agreement created b/w the shopkeeper and him and also we know that displaying goods is an invitation to offer
When the seller delivers goods to the buyer an approval basis, the property in the goods passes to the buyer when:- a)The buyer signifies his approval to the seller
- b)The buyer does any act adopting does any act adopting the transaction
- c)The buyer retains the goods beyond the stipulated period
- d)All of the above
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
When the seller delivers goods to the buyer an approval basis, the property in the goods passes to the buyer when:
a)
The buyer signifies his approval to the seller
b)
The buyer does any act adopting does any act adopting the transaction
c)
The buyer retains the goods beyond the stipulated period
d)
All of the above
|
Freedom Institute answered |
- In a sale on approval or "sale or return" basis, the buyer evaluates goods before deciding to purchase.
- The property in the goods passes to the buyer in the following scenarios:
- A: When the buyer explicitly approves the goods, showing intent to buy.
- B: When the buyer performs any action that implies acceptance of the transaction, like using or reselling the goods.
- C: When the buyer keeps the goods beyond the agreed review period without returning them.
- Therefore, the property passes under all these conditions, making D: All of the above the correct answer.
- The property in the goods passes to the buyer in the following scenarios:
- A: When the buyer explicitly approves the goods, showing intent to buy.
- B: When the buyer performs any action that implies acceptance of the transaction, like using or reselling the goods.
- C: When the buyer keeps the goods beyond the agreed review period without returning them.
- Therefore, the property passes under all these conditions, making D: All of the above the correct answer.
When there is a sale for unascertained goods under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 .The property in the goods does not pass to the buyer until the goods are _____.- a)Appropriated
- b)Ascertained
- c)Identified
- d)Set apart
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
When there is a sale for unascertained goods under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 .The property in the goods does not pass to the buyer until the goods are _____.
a)
Appropriated
b)
Ascertained
c)
Identified
d)
Set apart
|
Chirag Banerjee answered |
Passing of Unascertained Goods
If there is a contract for the sale of unascertained goods, then the passing of the property of the goods to the buyer cannot happen unless the goods are ascertained. This is specified under Section 18 of The Sale of Goods Act, 1930.
Prem Chand Picked Ram Chand’s camera and sold it to Gopal in a public auction. Gopal did not know that it was a stolen camera. Gopal cannot become the owner of the camera due to the principle of : - a)Estopple
- b)Nemo dat quod non-habet.
- c)Sale by one of the joint owners
- d)None of the above.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Prem Chand Picked Ram Chand’s camera and sold it to Gopal in a public auction. Gopal did not know that it was a stolen camera. Gopal cannot become the owner of the camera due to the principle of :
a)
Estopple
b)
Nemo dat quod non-habet.
c)
Sale by one of the joint owners
d)
None of the above.
|
|
Freedom Institute answered |
- Nemo dat quod non habet is a legal principle meaning "no one gives what they do not have."
- It implies that a person cannot transfer a better title than they possess.
- Prem Chand, not being the owner of the camera, cannot legally transfer ownership to Gopal.
- Gopal bought the camera in good faith at a public auction, but this does not override the original owner's rights.
- Therefore, Gopal cannot become the rightful owner.
- It implies that a person cannot transfer a better title than they possess.
- Prem Chand, not being the owner of the camera, cannot legally transfer ownership to Gopal.
- Gopal bought the camera in good faith at a public auction, but this does not override the original owner's rights.
- Therefore, Gopal cannot become the rightful owner.
When unpaid seller has resold the goods which are in his possession, the new buyer:- a)Gets good title on goods subject to consent of the original buyer
- b)Does not get good title on the goods
- c)Gets good title on the goods
- d)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
When unpaid seller has resold the goods which are in his possession, the new buyer:
a)
Gets good title on goods subject to consent of the original buyer
b)
Does not get good title on the goods
c)
Gets good title on the goods
d)
None of the above
|
Suresh Avinash answered |
Unpaid seller can sell the goods to any new buyer by just giving the notice to the old buyer. If the old buyer does not respond in reasonable time, then the seller can sell thee goods away. Giving notice is not mandatory here, if the notice is given then the seller can claim loss on resale of goods from the old buyer. If not, he cannot do so. If notice is not given, any profit on resale of goods must be accounted to old buyer, if notice given, no profit can be claimed by old buyer.
Hope it helped.
Hope it helped.
In case of Excess delivery, buyer is at liberty to - a)Accept the whole
- b)Reject the whole
- c)Accept the quantity as ordered and reject the rest
- d)Do any of the above
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
In case of Excess delivery, buyer is at liberty to
a)
Accept the whole
b)
Reject the whole
c)
Accept the quantity as ordered and reject the rest
d)
Do any of the above
|
|
Srsps answered |
- When a seller delivers more goods than ordered, the buyer has options under contract law.
- The buyer can:
- Accept the whole: Take all delivered goods even if it's more than ordered.
- Reject the whole: Refuse all goods due to excess delivery.
- Accept ordered quantity: Keep the correct amount and reject the surplus.
- This flexibility is intended to uphold fair trade practices and buyer satisfaction.
- Thus, the buyer can choose any of these actions, making D the correct answer.
- The buyer can:
- Accept the whole: Take all delivered goods even if it's more than ordered.
- Reject the whole: Refuse all goods due to excess delivery.
- Accept ordered quantity: Keep the correct amount and reject the surplus.
- This flexibility is intended to uphold fair trade practices and buyer satisfaction.
- Thus, the buyer can choose any of these actions, making D the correct answer.
In case of sale of a specific goods in a deliverable state, the property in the goods passes to the buyer when _______.- a)Contract is entered
- b)Payment is made by buyer
- c)Goods delivered and payment is made
- d)Goods delivered to buyer
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
In case of sale of a specific goods in a deliverable state, the property in the goods passes to the buyer when _______.
a)
Contract is entered
b)
Payment is made by buyer
c)
Goods delivered and payment is made
d)
Goods delivered to buyer
|
|
Rajat Patel answered |
According to Section 23 “Where there is a contract for the sale of unascertained or future goods by description and goods of that description as well as in deliverable state are unconditionally appropriated to the contract, either by the seller with the consent of the buyer or by the buyer with the consent of the seller, the property in the goods shall be transferred from the seller to the buyer, as soon as such appropriation is made, the consent of the buyer or the seller as the case may be obtained either before or after appropriation.
Anil sold stolen goods to Arvind and Arvind bought the said goods in good faith. Now the real owner of goods claims the goods from Arvind. In this case-----------.- a)The sale of goods by Anil is valid because goods were in his possession
- b)Arvind becomes owner of goods because he bought in good faith
- c)The maxim, “Nemo dat quad non habet” is applicable
- d)The maxim, “Nemo dat quad non habet” is not applicable.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Anil sold stolen goods to Arvind and Arvind bought the said goods in good faith. Now the real owner of goods claims the goods from Arvind. In this case-----------.
a)
The sale of goods by Anil is valid because goods were in his possession
b)
Arvind becomes owner of goods because he bought in good faith
c)
The maxim, “Nemo dat quad non habet” is applicable
d)
The maxim, “Nemo dat quad non habet” is not applicable.
|
|
Niharika Datta answered |
"nemo dat quod non habet" applies and Arvind has to return the goods to the real ownerd)Arvind gets to keep the goods because he paid for them
There cannot be a valid transfer of property in the goods which are sold by infringing a : - a)Copyright
- b)Trade mark
- c)Patent Right
- d)All the above
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
There cannot be a valid transfer of property in the goods which are sold by infringing a :
a)
Copyright
b)
Trade mark
c)
Patent Right
d)
All the above
|
|
Akshat Choudhary answered |
**Explanation:**
Infringement of intellectual property rights, such as copyright, trademark, and patent rights, can affect the validity of a transfer or sale of goods. Let's understand the impact of infringement on each of these rights:
**a) Copyright:**
Copyright law grants exclusive rights to the creator or owner of an original work, such as books, music, movies, etc. These rights include the right to reproduce, distribute, and publicly display the work. When goods are sold by infringing copyright, the transfer of property in those goods may not be valid because the seller does not have the legal right to sell or transfer the copyrighted material. The buyer may not acquire proper ownership or the right to use the copyrighted work.
**b) Trademark:**
A trademark is a distinctive sign, symbol, or logo used to identify and distinguish the goods or services of one business from those of others. Trademark infringement occurs when someone uses a trademark without authorization, leading to confusion among consumers. If goods are sold using a trademark that infringes on someone else's rights, the transfer of property in those goods may be invalid. The buyer may not acquire the genuine and authorized goods associated with the trademark.
**c) Patent Right:**
A patent is a legally granted exclusive right to inventors, allowing them to exclude others from making, using, or selling their invention for a limited period. If goods are sold by infringing a patent right, the transfer of property in those goods may not be valid. The seller does not have the legal right to sell or transfer the patented invention, and the buyer may not acquire the authorized product or the right to use the patented technology.
**d) All the above:**
Given the explanations above, it is clear that infringement of copyright, trademark, or patent rights can affect the validity of a transfer of property in goods. In all three cases, the seller does not have the legal right to sell or transfer the intellectual property, and the buyer may not acquire the authorized goods or rights associated with the intellectual property. Therefore, the correct answer is option 'D' - all the above.
Infringement of intellectual property rights, such as copyright, trademark, and patent rights, can affect the validity of a transfer or sale of goods. Let's understand the impact of infringement on each of these rights:
**a) Copyright:**
Copyright law grants exclusive rights to the creator or owner of an original work, such as books, music, movies, etc. These rights include the right to reproduce, distribute, and publicly display the work. When goods are sold by infringing copyright, the transfer of property in those goods may not be valid because the seller does not have the legal right to sell or transfer the copyrighted material. The buyer may not acquire proper ownership or the right to use the copyrighted work.
**b) Trademark:**
A trademark is a distinctive sign, symbol, or logo used to identify and distinguish the goods or services of one business from those of others. Trademark infringement occurs when someone uses a trademark without authorization, leading to confusion among consumers. If goods are sold using a trademark that infringes on someone else's rights, the transfer of property in those goods may be invalid. The buyer may not acquire the genuine and authorized goods associated with the trademark.
**c) Patent Right:**
A patent is a legally granted exclusive right to inventors, allowing them to exclude others from making, using, or selling their invention for a limited period. If goods are sold by infringing a patent right, the transfer of property in those goods may not be valid. The seller does not have the legal right to sell or transfer the patented invention, and the buyer may not acquire the authorized product or the right to use the patented technology.
**d) All the above:**
Given the explanations above, it is clear that infringement of copyright, trademark, or patent rights can affect the validity of a transfer of property in goods. In all three cases, the seller does not have the legal right to sell or transfer the intellectual property, and the buyer may not acquire the authorized goods or rights associated with the intellectual property. Therefore, the correct answer is option 'D' - all the above.
Where the seller delivers to the buyer a quantity of goods larger than he contracted to sell, the buyer may accept the goods included in the contract and reject the rest, or he may reject the whole. If the buyer accepts the whole of the goods so delivered he shall pay for them:- a)At the amount of the goods he ordered
- b)At the contract rate for whole goods
- c)Half of the amount
- d)Less then the rate
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Where the seller delivers to the buyer a quantity of goods larger than he contracted to sell, the buyer may accept the goods included in the contract and reject the rest, or he may reject the whole. If the buyer accepts the whole of the goods so delivered he shall pay for them:
a)
At the amount of the goods he ordered
b)
At the contract rate for whole goods
c)
Half of the amount
d)
Less then the rate
|
|
Saumya Khanna answered |
Explanation:
When the seller delivers to the buyer a quantity of goods larger than he contracted to sell, the buyer has the right to either accept the goods included in the contract and reject the rest, or reject the whole quantity. If the buyer chooses to accept the whole quantity of goods delivered, he is obligated to pay for them.
The correct answer is option 'B', which states that the buyer shall pay for the goods at the contract rate for the whole goods. This means that the buyer will be charged based on the agreed-upon price per unit for the entire quantity of goods delivered, regardless of the excess amount. The buyer is not required to pay more than the contract rate for the goods.
Reasoning:
When a seller delivers a quantity of goods larger than what was agreed upon in the contract, it is considered an excess delivery. In such a situation, the buyer has the right to accept the goods included in the contract and reject the excess quantity. Alternatively, the buyer can reject the entire delivery if they do not wish to accept any of the goods.
If the buyer chooses to accept the whole quantity of goods delivered, they are obligated to pay for them. However, the buyer is not required to pay more than the contract rate for the goods. The contract rate is the agreed-upon price per unit of the goods. Therefore, the buyer will be charged based on this rate for the entire quantity of goods delivered.
Paying at the contract rate ensures that the buyer is not penalized for the seller's mistake in delivering excess goods. It also prevents the seller from benefiting from the excess delivery by charging a higher price.
In conclusion, when the buyer accepts the whole quantity of goods delivered, they are required to pay for them at the contract rate for the entire goods. This ensures fairness and protects the buyer's rights in the transaction.
When the seller delivers to the buyer a quantity of goods larger than he contracted to sell, the buyer has the right to either accept the goods included in the contract and reject the rest, or reject the whole quantity. If the buyer chooses to accept the whole quantity of goods delivered, he is obligated to pay for them.
The correct answer is option 'B', which states that the buyer shall pay for the goods at the contract rate for the whole goods. This means that the buyer will be charged based on the agreed-upon price per unit for the entire quantity of goods delivered, regardless of the excess amount. The buyer is not required to pay more than the contract rate for the goods.
Reasoning:
When a seller delivers a quantity of goods larger than what was agreed upon in the contract, it is considered an excess delivery. In such a situation, the buyer has the right to accept the goods included in the contract and reject the excess quantity. Alternatively, the buyer can reject the entire delivery if they do not wish to accept any of the goods.
If the buyer chooses to accept the whole quantity of goods delivered, they are obligated to pay for them. However, the buyer is not required to pay more than the contract rate for the goods. The contract rate is the agreed-upon price per unit of the goods. Therefore, the buyer will be charged based on this rate for the entire quantity of goods delivered.
Paying at the contract rate ensures that the buyer is not penalized for the seller's mistake in delivering excess goods. It also prevents the seller from benefiting from the excess delivery by charging a higher price.
In conclusion, when the buyer accepts the whole quantity of goods delivered, they are required to pay for them at the contract rate for the entire goods. This ensures fairness and protects the buyer's rights in the transaction.
Passing of property in goods constitutes the most important element in deciding the legal rights and liabilities of the________.- a)Sellers
- b)Buyers
- c)Sellers and Buyers both
- d)None of the above.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Passing of property in goods constitutes the most important element in deciding the legal rights and liabilities of the________.
a)
Sellers
b)
Buyers
c)
Sellers and Buyers both
d)
None of the above.
|
|
Akshay Das answered |
Passing of Property in Goods: Legal Rights and Liabilities of Sellers and Buyers
Passing of property in goods refers to the transfer of ownership or title of goods from the seller to the buyer. It is a crucial element in determining the legal rights and liabilities of both the sellers and the buyers in a transaction. Let us explore why passing of property is the most important element in deciding the legal rights and liabilities of both parties.
1. Definition of Passing of Property:
When property in goods passes from the seller to the buyer, it means that the ownership and control of the goods are transferred. The moment property passes determines the rights and liabilities of the parties involved.
2. Legal Rights and Liabilities of Sellers:
- Until the property in goods is passed, the seller retains ownership and control over the goods. This means that the seller has the right to possess and dispose of the goods.
- If the goods are damaged or destroyed before the passing of property, the seller bears the risk of loss.
- Once the property in goods is passed, the seller's liability for the goods generally ends, unless there are specific warranties or guarantees provided.
3. Legal Rights and Liabilities of Buyers:
- Once the property in goods is passed, the buyer becomes the owner of the goods and has the right to possess, use, and dispose of them.
- The buyer becomes responsible for any risks associated with the goods after the passing of property. This includes the risk of damage, loss, or defects in the goods.
- If the goods are damaged or defective at the time of passing of property, the buyer may have the right to reject the goods or claim compensation from the seller.
4. Importance of Passing of Property:
- Passing of property determines the transfer of ownership and control, which is essential for establishing the legal rights and liabilities of both the sellers and the buyers.
- It clarifies when the risks and benefits of ownership are transferred from the seller to the buyer.
- The passing of property is crucial for resolving disputes related to ownership, possession, and liability for the goods.
In conclusion, passing of property in goods constitutes the most important element in deciding the legal rights and liabilities of both sellers and buyers. It determines the transfer of ownership, control, and associated risks. Understanding the moment when property passes is crucial for establishing the rights and responsibilities of the parties involved in a transaction.
Passing of property in goods refers to the transfer of ownership or title of goods from the seller to the buyer. It is a crucial element in determining the legal rights and liabilities of both the sellers and the buyers in a transaction. Let us explore why passing of property is the most important element in deciding the legal rights and liabilities of both parties.
1. Definition of Passing of Property:
When property in goods passes from the seller to the buyer, it means that the ownership and control of the goods are transferred. The moment property passes determines the rights and liabilities of the parties involved.
2. Legal Rights and Liabilities of Sellers:
- Until the property in goods is passed, the seller retains ownership and control over the goods. This means that the seller has the right to possess and dispose of the goods.
- If the goods are damaged or destroyed before the passing of property, the seller bears the risk of loss.
- Once the property in goods is passed, the seller's liability for the goods generally ends, unless there are specific warranties or guarantees provided.
3. Legal Rights and Liabilities of Buyers:
- Once the property in goods is passed, the buyer becomes the owner of the goods and has the right to possess, use, and dispose of them.
- The buyer becomes responsible for any risks associated with the goods after the passing of property. This includes the risk of damage, loss, or defects in the goods.
- If the goods are damaged or defective at the time of passing of property, the buyer may have the right to reject the goods or claim compensation from the seller.
4. Importance of Passing of Property:
- Passing of property determines the transfer of ownership and control, which is essential for establishing the legal rights and liabilities of both the sellers and the buyers.
- It clarifies when the risks and benefits of ownership are transferred from the seller to the buyer.
- The passing of property is crucial for resolving disputes related to ownership, possession, and liability for the goods.
In conclusion, passing of property in goods constitutes the most important element in deciding the legal rights and liabilities of both sellers and buyers. It determines the transfer of ownership, control, and associated risks. Understanding the moment when property passes is crucial for establishing the rights and responsibilities of the parties involved in a transaction.
If goods are rejected by the buyer and the carrier continues in possession of these, and the seller has refused to receive these back, the transit: - a)Is at an end.
- b)Is deemed to be at an end.
- c)Is not deemed to be at an end.
- d)Is not affected at all.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
If goods are rejected by the buyer and the carrier continues in possession of these, and the seller has refused to receive these back, the transit:
a)
Is at an end.
b)
Is deemed to be at an end.
c)
Is not deemed to be at an end.
d)
Is not affected at all.
|
|
Rithika Nair answered |
If the goods are rejected by the buyer and the carrier continues in possession of them, the transit is deemed to end, even if the seller has refused to receive them back. On the other hand, whether the carrier wrongfully refuses to deliver the goods to the buyer, the transit is deemed to be at an end.
Passing of title or transfer of property constitutes the most important element to decide the legal rights and liabilities of _________.- a)Seller only
- b)Buyer only
- c)Both seller and buyer
- d)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Passing of title or transfer of property constitutes the most important element to decide the legal rights and liabilities of _________.
a)
Seller only
b)
Buyer only
c)
Both seller and buyer
d)
None of the above
|
|
Freedom Institute answered |
The passing of title or transfer of property is crucial in determining the legal rights and liabilities of both the seller and buyer. Here's why:
- It signifies the moment when ownership of the goods shifts from the seller to the buyer.
- The buyer gains the right to possess, use, and resell the goods.
- The seller is relieved from the responsibility for the goods and entitled to payment.
- Risks associated with the goods, such as damage or loss, typically transfer with the title.
Thus, it affects both parties, making option C the correct choice.
The risk goods passes to the buyer when:- a)The contract of sale is made
- b)Ownership in the goods is transferred to the buyer
- c)When the goods are delivered to the buyer
- d)When the buyer pays the full price.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
The risk goods passes to the buyer when:
a)
The contract of sale is made
b)
Ownership in the goods is transferred to the buyer
c)
When the goods are delivered to the buyer
d)
When the buyer pays the full price.
|
|
Srsps answered |
- Risk in Goods and Ownership: Risk typically transfers with ownership, meaning once a buyer owns the goods, they also bear the risk.
- Legal Principle: According to many legal systems, the risk of loss or damage to goods passes to the buyer when ownership is transferred.
- Ownership Transfer: This happens when the parties intend it, often specified in the contract. If not specified, it usually aligns with the point of sale.
- Implication: This means buyers must ensure goods after ownership to protect against loss or damage.
- Legal Principle: According to many legal systems, the risk of loss or damage to goods passes to the buyer when ownership is transferred.
- Ownership Transfer: This happens when the parties intend it, often specified in the contract. If not specified, it usually aligns with the point of sale.
- Implication: This means buyers must ensure goods after ownership to protect against loss or damage.
Chapter doubts & questions for Unit 3: Transfer of Ownership and Delivery of Goods - Business Laws for CA Foundation 2025 is part of CA Foundation exam preparation. The chapters have been prepared according to the CA Foundation exam syllabus. The Chapter doubts & questions, notes, tests & MCQs are made for CA Foundation 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests here.
Chapter doubts & questions of Unit 3: Transfer of Ownership and Delivery of Goods - Business Laws for CA Foundation in English & Hindi are available as part of CA Foundation exam.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CA Foundation Exam by signing up for free.
Business Laws for CA Foundation
51 videos|110 docs|57 tests
|
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Study with 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos & Tests
10M+ students study on EduRev
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
Signup to see your scores
go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup