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.