CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  Directions: The question is based on the reas... Start Learning for Free
Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.
Bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished.
Contracts of bailment are a special class of contract. The circumstance in which this happens are numerous. Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines 'bailment' as 'the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed off according to the directions of the person delivering them'. According to Section 150 of the Indian Contract Act, which deals with the duties of bailor, bailors are of two kinds viz. 1) Gratuitous bailor 2) Bailor for reward/consideration. It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. A gratuitous bailment can be terminated by the bailor at any time even though the bailment was for a specified time or purpose. But in such a case, the loss accruing to the bailee from such premature termination should not exceed the benefit he has derived out of the bailment. If the loss exceeds the benefit, the bailor shall have to indemnify the bailee. The duty of a bailor for consideration is much greater. He is making profit from his profession and, therefore, it is his duty to see that the goods which he delivers are reasonably safe for the purpose of the bailment. It is no defence for him to say that he was not aware of the defect. However, the bailee is bound to bear ordinary and reasonable expenses of bailment, but for any extraordinary expenses, the bailor is responsible. It is the duty of the bailor to receive back the goods when the bailee returns them after the expiry of the term of the bailment or when the purpose for which the bailment was created has been accomplished. If the bailor refuses to receive back the goods, the bailee is entitled to receive compensation from the bailor, the necessary expenses of custody/storage. Where the title of the bailor to the goods is defective and the bailee suffers as a consequence, the bailor is responsible to the bailee and may, by reason, sustain that the bailor was not entitled to make bailment, or to receive back the goods, or to give directions respecting them. From the above discussion, it can be seen that bailment is a contract, whereby a delivery of possession is given of specific goods to another for some purpose with the direction that the goods shall be returned or disposed off on fulfillment of the purpose.
Q. X & Y were close friends since childhood and both knew each other from skin to bone. X knew that Y was a ferocious horse-rider and out of habit, he tried to take every horse for a stride. X bought a horse and after taking it for rides came to know that the horse had developed an infection on his lower abdomen owing to which hitting it there would make it go wild which could be risky for a rider, particularly for a novice rider. Y, on seeing X's horse, asked X to exchange it for the purpose of a countryside ride with Y's horse. X agreeded to the same. Y, out of habit again took this horse for a stride in the course of which he was hitting it on lower abdomen. The horse got wild and smashed Y on a rock which resulted in hospitalisation of Y. Y filed a claim for damages against X. Decide.
  • a)
    Y will suceed in his claim as X failed to mention about the infection.
  • b)
    Y will not succeed in his claim as he took the horse in exchange and not in bailment.
  • c)
    Y will not succeed in his claim as the risk was for a novice rider and Y was doing horse-riding since long. Hence, X's duty to mention about the infection does not arise in this case.
  • d)
    Both [2] & [3]
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Verified Answer
Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or f...
It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the known faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. Here it was not mere exchange as bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished. The purpose here was countryside ride.
View all questions of this test
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Sec. 126 of the Indian Contract Act, defines a contract of guarantee as "A contract to perform the promise, or discharge the liability of a third person in case of his defaults". A guarantee may be either "oral" or "written". Just like any other contracts, it should also fulfill all the essentials of a valid contract. As stated already, three parties are involved in a contract of guarantee.All the three parties namely, the principal debtor, the creditor and the surety must agree to make such a contract. A contract of guarantee pre-supposes the existence of a liability, which is enforceable at law. If no such liability exists, there can be no contract of guarantee. Thus, where the debt, which is sought to be guaranteed, is already time barred or void, the surety is not liable. There must be consideration between the creditor and the surety so as to make the contract enforceable. The consideration must also be lawful. In a contract of guarantee, the consideration received by the principal debtor is taken to be the sufficient consideration for the surety. Thus, any benefit received by the debtor is adequate consideration to bind the surety. But past consideration is no consideration for a contract of guarantee. There must be a fresh consideration moving from the creditor. A contract of guarantee may either be oral or written. In a contract of guarantee, liability of the surety is secondary, i.e. the creditor must first proceed against the debtor and if the latter does not perform his promise, then only he can proceed against the surety. It may be express or implied from the conduct of parties. The creditor should disclose to the surety the facts that are likely to affect the suretys liability. The guarantee obtained by the concealment of such facts is invalid. Thus, the guarantee is invalid if the creditor obtains it by the concealment of material facts The guarantee should not be obtained by misrepresenting the facts to the surety. Though the contract of guarantee is not a contract of uberrimae fidei, i.e. of absolute good faith, and thus, does not require complete disclosure of all the material facts by the principal debtor or creditor to the surety before he enters into a contract. But the facts, that are likely to affect the extent of suretys responsibility, must be truly represented.Q.Chetan lends money to Ashu. Chetan while signing the contract asks Ashu if she has a guarantor. Ashu without any intimation to Anuj gave his name as the guarantor. Ashu later on convinced Anuj to be the guarantor, but upon Ashus default, Anuj refused to pay. Decide.

The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Sec. 126 of the Indian Contract Act, defines a contract of guarantee as "A contract to perform the promise, or discharge the liability of a third person in case of his defaults". A guarantee may be either "oral" or "written". Just like any other contracts, it should also fulfill all the essentials of a valid contract. As stated already, three parties are involved in a contract of guarantee.All the three parties namely, the principal debtor, the creditor and the surety must agree to make such a contract. A contract of guarantee pre-supposes the existence of a liability, which is enforceable at law. If no such liability exists, there can be no contract of guarantee. Thus, where the debt, which is sought to be guaranteed, is already time barred or void, the surety is not liable. There must be consideration between the creditor and the surety so as to make the contract enforceable. The consideration must also be lawful. In a contract of guarantee, the consideration received by the principal debtor is taken to be the sufficient consideration for the surety. Thus, any benefit received by the debtor is adequate consideration to bind the surety. But past consideration is no consideration for a contract of guarantee. There must be a fresh consideration moving from the creditor. A contract of guarantee may either be oral or written. In a contract of guarantee, liability of the surety is secondary, i.e. the creditor must first proceed against the debtor and if the latter does not perform his promise, then only he can proceed against the surety. It may be express or implied from the conduct of parties. The creditor should disclose to the surety the facts that are likely to affect the suretys liability. The guarantee obtained by the concealment of such facts is invalid. Thus, the guarantee is invalid if the creditor obtains it by the concealment of material facts The guarantee should not be obtained by misrepresenting the facts to the surety. Though the contract of guarantee is not a contract of uberrimae fidei, i.e. of absolute good faith, and thus, does not require complete disclosure of all the material facts by the principal debtor or creditor to the surety before he enters into a contract. But the facts, that are likely to affect the extent of suretys responsibility, must be truly represented.Q.Chetna advances loan of Rs 1 lakh to Chitra. Palak, boss of Chitra, promises that in case Chitra fails to repay the loan, she will repay the same. Chitra fails to repay the loan upon being declared bankrupt. Chetna filed a case against Palak for default. Decide.

The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Sec. 126 of the Indian Contract Act, defines a contract of guarantee as "A contract to perform the promise, or discharge the liability of a third person in case of his defaults". A guarantee may be either "oral" or "written". Just like any other contracts, it should also fulfill all the essentials of a valid contract. As stated already, three parties are involved in a contract of guarantee.All the three parties namely, the principal debtor, the creditor and the surety must agree to make such a contract. A contract of guarantee pre-supposes the existence of a liability, which is enforceable at law. If no such liability exists, there can be no contract of guarantee. Thus, where the debt, which is sought to be guaranteed, is already time barred or void, the surety is not liable. There must be consideration between the creditor and the surety so as to make the contract enforceable. The consideration must also be lawful. In a contract of guarantee, the consideration received by the principal debtor is taken to be the sufficient consideration for the surety. Thus, any benefit received by the debtor is adequate consideration to bind the surety. But past consideration is no consideration for a contract of guarantee. There must be a fresh consideration moving from the creditor. A contract of guarantee may either be oral or written. In a contract of guarantee, liability of the surety is secondary, i.e. the creditor must first proceed against the debtor and if the latter does not perform his promise, then only he can proceed against the surety. It may be express or implied from the conduct of parties. The creditor should disclose to the surety the facts that are likely to affect the suretys liability. The guarantee obtained by the concealment of such facts is invalid. Thus, the guarantee is invalid if the creditor obtains it by the concealment of material facts The guarantee should not be obtained by misrepresenting the facts to the surety. Though the contract of guarantee is not a contract of uberrimae fidei, i.e. of absolute good faith, and thus, does not require complete disclosure of all the material facts by the principal debtor or creditor to the surety before he enters into a contract. But the facts, that are likely to affect the extent of suretys responsibility, must be truly represented.Q.Anjan supplies goods to Neel on Lavins guarantee that he will pay if Neel defaults and he provides guarantee orally. He agreed to sign a contract later on. Neel made a default on payment. Having not signed the contract of guarantee, Lavin wanted to wriggle out of the situation. He said he didnt stand as a guarantor. Decide.

Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.In contracts of insurance, indemnity or guarantee one thing in common is that they create an obligation on the promisor if an event which is collateral to the contract does or does not happen. The insurer is not called into action until the event of the death of the insured happens. This is a contingent contract.Under Section 31 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, contingent contracts are defined as a contract in which two or more parties enter into a contract to do or not do something, if an event which is collateral to the contract does or does not happen, then it is a contingent contract.The condition for which the contract has been entered into must be a future event, and it should be uncertain. If the performance of the contract is dependent on an event, which is although a future event, but certain and sure to happen, then itll not be considered as a contingent contract.The contingent contracts to do or abstain from doing something if an uncertain future event happens. However, the contract cannot be enforced by law unless the event takes place. If the event becomes impossible, such contracts become void.If a contract contingent upon how a person will act at a future time, the event shall be considered impossible when such person does anything which makes it impossible for the event to happen. Such an agreement is valid.Contingent contracts to do or not to do anything if a future uncertain event happens within a fixed time. Such a contract is void if the event does not happen and the time lapses. It is also void if before the time fixed, the happening of the event becomes impossible. Contingent contract to do or not to do anything if an uncertain event does not happen within a fixed time may be enforced by law when the fixed time has expired, and such event has not happened, or before the time fixed has expired, if it becomes certain that such event will not happen.Q.X is a private insurer and enters into a contract with Y for fire insurance of Ys house. According to the terms, X agrees to pay Y an amount of Rs. 5 lakh if his house is burnt against an annual premium of Rs. 10,000. Is this a contingent contract?

Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.In contracts of insurance, indemnity or guarantee one thing in common is that they create an obligation on the promisor if an event which is collateral to the contract does or does not happen. The insurer is not called into action until the event of the death of the insured happens. This is a contingent contract.Under Section 31 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, contingent contracts are defined as a contract in which two or more parties enter into a contract to do or not do something, if an event which is collateral to the contract does or does not happen, then it is a contingent contract.The condition for which the contract has been entered into must be a future event, and it should be uncertain. If the performance of the contract is dependent on an event, which is although a future event, but certain and sure to happen, then itll not be considered as a contingent contract.The contingent contracts to do or abstain from doing something if an uncertain future event happens. However, the contract cannot be enforced by law unless the event takes place. If the event becomes impossible, such contracts become void.If a contract contingent upon how a person will act at a future time, the event shall be considered impossible when such person does anything which makes it impossible for the event to happen. Such an agreement is valid.Contingent contracts to do or not to do anything if a future uncertain event happens within a fixed time. Such a contract is void if the event does not happen and the time lapses. It is also void if before the time fixed, the happening of the event becomes impossible. Contingent contract to do or not to do anything if an uncertain event does not happen within a fixed time may be enforced by law when the fixed time has expired, and such event has not happened, or before the time fixed has expired, if it becomes certain that such event will not happen.Q.X promises to pay Y some consideration if he marries Z. However, Z marries A. What is the status of this agreement?

Top Courses for CLAT

Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished.Contracts of bailment are a special class of contract. The circumstance in which this happens are numerous. Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines bailment as the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed off according to the directions of the person delivering them. According to Section 150 of the Indian Contract Act, which deals with the duties of bailor, bailors are of two kinds viz. 1) Gratuitous bailor 2) Bailor for reward/consideration. It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. A gratuitous bailment can be terminated by the bailor at any time even though the bailment was for a specified time or purpose. But in such a case, the loss accruing to the bailee from such premature termination should not exceed the benefit he has derived out of the bailment. If the loss exceeds the benefit, the bailor shall have to indemnify the bailee. The duty of a bailor for consideration is much greater. He is making profit from his profession and, therefore, it is his duty to see that the goods which he delivers are reasonably safe for the purpose of the bailment. It is no defence for him to say that he was not aware of the defect. However, the bailee is bound to bear ordinary and reasonable expenses of bailment, but for any extraordinary expenses, the bailor is responsible. It is the duty of the bailor to receive back the goods when the bailee returns them after the expiry of the term of the bailment or when the purpose for which the bailment was created has been accomplished. If the bailor refuses to receive back the goods, the bailee is entitled to receive compensation from the bailor, the necessary expenses of custody/storage. Where the title of the bailor to the goods is defective and the bailee suffers as a consequence, the bailor is responsible to the bailee and may, by reason, sustain that the bailor was not entitled to make bailment, or to receive back the goods, or to give directions respecting them. From the above discussion, it can be seen that bailment is a contract, whereby a delivery of possession is given of specific goods to another for some purpose with the direction that the goods shall be returned or disposed off on fulfillment of the purpose.Q.X & Y were close friends since childhood and both knew each other from skin to bone. X knew that Y was a ferocious horse-rider and out of habit, he tried to take every horse for a stride. X bought a horse and after taking it for rides came to know that the horse had developed an infection on his lower abdomen owing to which hitting it there would make it go wild which could be risky for a rider, particularly for a novice rider. Y, on seeing Xs horse, asked X to exchange it for the purpose of a countryside ride with Ys horse. X agreeded to the same. Y, out of habit again took this horse for a stride in the course of which he was hitting it on lower abdomen. The horse got wild and smashed Y on a rock which resulted in hospitalisation of Y. Y filed a claim for damages against X. Decide.a)Y will suceed in his claim as X failed to mention about the infection.b)Y will not succeed in his claim as he took the horse in exchange and not in bailment.c)Y will not succeed in his claim as the risk was for a novice rider and Y was doing horse-riding since long. Hence, Xs duty to mention about the infection does not arise in this case.d)Both [2] & [3]Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished.Contracts of bailment are a special class of contract. The circumstance in which this happens are numerous. Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines bailment as the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed off according to the directions of the person delivering them. According to Section 150 of the Indian Contract Act, which deals with the duties of bailor, bailors are of two kinds viz. 1) Gratuitous bailor 2) Bailor for reward/consideration. It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. A gratuitous bailment can be terminated by the bailor at any time even though the bailment was for a specified time or purpose. But in such a case, the loss accruing to the bailee from such premature termination should not exceed the benefit he has derived out of the bailment. If the loss exceeds the benefit, the bailor shall have to indemnify the bailee. The duty of a bailor for consideration is much greater. He is making profit from his profession and, therefore, it is his duty to see that the goods which he delivers are reasonably safe for the purpose of the bailment. It is no defence for him to say that he was not aware of the defect. However, the bailee is bound to bear ordinary and reasonable expenses of bailment, but for any extraordinary expenses, the bailor is responsible. It is the duty of the bailor to receive back the goods when the bailee returns them after the expiry of the term of the bailment or when the purpose for which the bailment was created has been accomplished. If the bailor refuses to receive back the goods, the bailee is entitled to receive compensation from the bailor, the necessary expenses of custody/storage. Where the title of the bailor to the goods is defective and the bailee suffers as a consequence, the bailor is responsible to the bailee and may, by reason, sustain that the bailor was not entitled to make bailment, or to receive back the goods, or to give directions respecting them. From the above discussion, it can be seen that bailment is a contract, whereby a delivery of possession is given of specific goods to another for some purpose with the direction that the goods shall be returned or disposed off on fulfillment of the purpose.Q.X & Y were close friends since childhood and both knew each other from skin to bone. X knew that Y was a ferocious horse-rider and out of habit, he tried to take every horse for a stride. X bought a horse and after taking it for rides came to know that the horse had developed an infection on his lower abdomen owing to which hitting it there would make it go wild which could be risky for a rider, particularly for a novice rider. Y, on seeing Xs horse, asked X to exchange it for the purpose of a countryside ride with Ys horse. X agreeded to the same. Y, out of habit again took this horse for a stride in the course of which he was hitting it on lower abdomen. The horse got wild and smashed Y on a rock which resulted in hospitalisation of Y. Y filed a claim for damages against X. Decide.a)Y will suceed in his claim as X failed to mention about the infection.b)Y will not succeed in his claim as he took the horse in exchange and not in bailment.c)Y will not succeed in his claim as the risk was for a novice rider and Y was doing horse-riding since long. Hence, Xs duty to mention about the infection does not arise in this case.d)Both [2] & [3]Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished.Contracts of bailment are a special class of contract. The circumstance in which this happens are numerous. Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines bailment as the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed off according to the directions of the person delivering them. According to Section 150 of the Indian Contract Act, which deals with the duties of bailor, bailors are of two kinds viz. 1) Gratuitous bailor 2) Bailor for reward/consideration. It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. A gratuitous bailment can be terminated by the bailor at any time even though the bailment was for a specified time or purpose. But in such a case, the loss accruing to the bailee from such premature termination should not exceed the benefit he has derived out of the bailment. If the loss exceeds the benefit, the bailor shall have to indemnify the bailee. The duty of a bailor for consideration is much greater. He is making profit from his profession and, therefore, it is his duty to see that the goods which he delivers are reasonably safe for the purpose of the bailment. It is no defence for him to say that he was not aware of the defect. However, the bailee is bound to bear ordinary and reasonable expenses of bailment, but for any extraordinary expenses, the bailor is responsible. It is the duty of the bailor to receive back the goods when the bailee returns them after the expiry of the term of the bailment or when the purpose for which the bailment was created has been accomplished. If the bailor refuses to receive back the goods, the bailee is entitled to receive compensation from the bailor, the necessary expenses of custody/storage. Where the title of the bailor to the goods is defective and the bailee suffers as a consequence, the bailor is responsible to the bailee and may, by reason, sustain that the bailor was not entitled to make bailment, or to receive back the goods, or to give directions respecting them. From the above discussion, it can be seen that bailment is a contract, whereby a delivery of possession is given of specific goods to another for some purpose with the direction that the goods shall be returned or disposed off on fulfillment of the purpose.Q.X & Y were close friends since childhood and both knew each other from skin to bone. X knew that Y was a ferocious horse-rider and out of habit, he tried to take every horse for a stride. X bought a horse and after taking it for rides came to know that the horse had developed an infection on his lower abdomen owing to which hitting it there would make it go wild which could be risky for a rider, particularly for a novice rider. Y, on seeing Xs horse, asked X to exchange it for the purpose of a countryside ride with Ys horse. X agreeded to the same. Y, out of habit again took this horse for a stride in the course of which he was hitting it on lower abdomen. The horse got wild and smashed Y on a rock which resulted in hospitalisation of Y. Y filed a claim for damages against X. Decide.a)Y will suceed in his claim as X failed to mention about the infection.b)Y will not succeed in his claim as he took the horse in exchange and not in bailment.c)Y will not succeed in his claim as the risk was for a novice rider and Y was doing horse-riding since long. Hence, Xs duty to mention about the infection does not arise in this case.d)Both [2] & [3]Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished.Contracts of bailment are a special class of contract. The circumstance in which this happens are numerous. Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines bailment as the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed off according to the directions of the person delivering them. According to Section 150 of the Indian Contract Act, which deals with the duties of bailor, bailors are of two kinds viz. 1) Gratuitous bailor 2) Bailor for reward/consideration. It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. A gratuitous bailment can be terminated by the bailor at any time even though the bailment was for a specified time or purpose. But in such a case, the loss accruing to the bailee from such premature termination should not exceed the benefit he has derived out of the bailment. If the loss exceeds the benefit, the bailor shall have to indemnify the bailee. The duty of a bailor for consideration is much greater. He is making profit from his profession and, therefore, it is his duty to see that the goods which he delivers are reasonably safe for the purpose of the bailment. It is no defence for him to say that he was not aware of the defect. However, the bailee is bound to bear ordinary and reasonable expenses of bailment, but for any extraordinary expenses, the bailor is responsible. It is the duty of the bailor to receive back the goods when the bailee returns them after the expiry of the term of the bailment or when the purpose for which the bailment was created has been accomplished. If the bailor refuses to receive back the goods, the bailee is entitled to receive compensation from the bailor, the necessary expenses of custody/storage. Where the title of the bailor to the goods is defective and the bailee suffers as a consequence, the bailor is responsible to the bailee and may, by reason, sustain that the bailor was not entitled to make bailment, or to receive back the goods, or to give directions respecting them. From the above discussion, it can be seen that bailment is a contract, whereby a delivery of possession is given of specific goods to another for some purpose with the direction that the goods shall be returned or disposed off on fulfillment of the purpose.Q.X & Y were close friends since childhood and both knew each other from skin to bone. X knew that Y was a ferocious horse-rider and out of habit, he tried to take every horse for a stride. X bought a horse and after taking it for rides came to know that the horse had developed an infection on his lower abdomen owing to which hitting it there would make it go wild which could be risky for a rider, particularly for a novice rider. Y, on seeing Xs horse, asked X to exchange it for the purpose of a countryside ride with Ys horse. X agreeded to the same. Y, out of habit again took this horse for a stride in the course of which he was hitting it on lower abdomen. The horse got wild and smashed Y on a rock which resulted in hospitalisation of Y. Y filed a claim for damages against X. Decide.a)Y will suceed in his claim as X failed to mention about the infection.b)Y will not succeed in his claim as he took the horse in exchange and not in bailment.c)Y will not succeed in his claim as the risk was for a novice rider and Y was doing horse-riding since long. Hence, Xs duty to mention about the infection does not arise in this case.d)Both [2] & [3]Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished.Contracts of bailment are a special class of contract. The circumstance in which this happens are numerous. Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines bailment as the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed off according to the directions of the person delivering them. According to Section 150 of the Indian Contract Act, which deals with the duties of bailor, bailors are of two kinds viz. 1) Gratuitous bailor 2) Bailor for reward/consideration. It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. A gratuitous bailment can be terminated by the bailor at any time even though the bailment was for a specified time or purpose. But in such a case, the loss accruing to the bailee from such premature termination should not exceed the benefit he has derived out of the bailment. If the loss exceeds the benefit, the bailor shall have to indemnify the bailee. The duty of a bailor for consideration is much greater. He is making profit from his profession and, therefore, it is his duty to see that the goods which he delivers are reasonably safe for the purpose of the bailment. It is no defence for him to say that he was not aware of the defect. However, the bailee is bound to bear ordinary and reasonable expenses of bailment, but for any extraordinary expenses, the bailor is responsible. It is the duty of the bailor to receive back the goods when the bailee returns them after the expiry of the term of the bailment or when the purpose for which the bailment was created has been accomplished. If the bailor refuses to receive back the goods, the bailee is entitled to receive compensation from the bailor, the necessary expenses of custody/storage. Where the title of the bailor to the goods is defective and the bailee suffers as a consequence, the bailor is responsible to the bailee and may, by reason, sustain that the bailor was not entitled to make bailment, or to receive back the goods, or to give directions respecting them. From the above discussion, it can be seen that bailment is a contract, whereby a delivery of possession is given of specific goods to another for some purpose with the direction that the goods shall be returned or disposed off on fulfillment of the purpose.Q.X & Y were close friends since childhood and both knew each other from skin to bone. X knew that Y was a ferocious horse-rider and out of habit, he tried to take every horse for a stride. X bought a horse and after taking it for rides came to know that the horse had developed an infection on his lower abdomen owing to which hitting it there would make it go wild which could be risky for a rider, particularly for a novice rider. Y, on seeing Xs horse, asked X to exchange it for the purpose of a countryside ride with Ys horse. X agreeded to the same. Y, out of habit again took this horse for a stride in the course of which he was hitting it on lower abdomen. The horse got wild and smashed Y on a rock which resulted in hospitalisation of Y. Y filed a claim for damages against X. Decide.a)Y will suceed in his claim as X failed to mention about the infection.b)Y will not succeed in his claim as he took the horse in exchange and not in bailment.c)Y will not succeed in his claim as the risk was for a novice rider and Y was doing horse-riding since long. Hence, Xs duty to mention about the infection does not arise in this case.d)Both [2] & [3]Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished.Contracts of bailment are a special class of contract. The circumstance in which this happens are numerous. Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines bailment as the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed off according to the directions of the person delivering them. According to Section 150 of the Indian Contract Act, which deals with the duties of bailor, bailors are of two kinds viz. 1) Gratuitous bailor 2) Bailor for reward/consideration. It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. A gratuitous bailment can be terminated by the bailor at any time even though the bailment was for a specified time or purpose. But in such a case, the loss accruing to the bailee from such premature termination should not exceed the benefit he has derived out of the bailment. If the loss exceeds the benefit, the bailor shall have to indemnify the bailee. The duty of a bailor for consideration is much greater. He is making profit from his profession and, therefore, it is his duty to see that the goods which he delivers are reasonably safe for the purpose of the bailment. It is no defence for him to say that he was not aware of the defect. However, the bailee is bound to bear ordinary and reasonable expenses of bailment, but for any extraordinary expenses, the bailor is responsible. It is the duty of the bailor to receive back the goods when the bailee returns them after the expiry of the term of the bailment or when the purpose for which the bailment was created has been accomplished. If the bailor refuses to receive back the goods, the bailee is entitled to receive compensation from the bailor, the necessary expenses of custody/storage. Where the title of the bailor to the goods is defective and the bailee suffers as a consequence, the bailor is responsible to the bailee and may, by reason, sustain that the bailor was not entitled to make bailment, or to receive back the goods, or to give directions respecting them. From the above discussion, it can be seen that bailment is a contract, whereby a delivery of possession is given of specific goods to another for some purpose with the direction that the goods shall be returned or disposed off on fulfillment of the purpose.Q.X & Y were close friends since childhood and both knew each other from skin to bone. X knew that Y was a ferocious horse-rider and out of habit, he tried to take every horse for a stride. X bought a horse and after taking it for rides came to know that the horse had developed an infection on his lower abdomen owing to which hitting it there would make it go wild which could be risky for a rider, particularly for a novice rider. Y, on seeing Xs horse, asked X to exchange it for the purpose of a countryside ride with Ys horse. X agreeded to the same. Y, out of habit again took this horse for a stride in the course of which he was hitting it on lower abdomen. The horse got wild and smashed Y on a rock which resulted in hospitalisation of Y. Y filed a claim for damages against X. Decide.a)Y will suceed in his claim as X failed to mention about the infection.b)Y will not succeed in his claim as he took the horse in exchange and not in bailment.c)Y will not succeed in his claim as the risk was for a novice rider and Y was doing horse-riding since long. Hence, Xs duty to mention about the infection does not arise in this case.d)Both [2] & [3]Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished.Contracts of bailment are a special class of contract. The circumstance in which this happens are numerous. Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines bailment as the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed off according to the directions of the person delivering them. According to Section 150 of the Indian Contract Act, which deals with the duties of bailor, bailors are of two kinds viz. 1) Gratuitous bailor 2) Bailor for reward/consideration. It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. A gratuitous bailment can be terminated by the bailor at any time even though the bailment was for a specified time or purpose. But in such a case, the loss accruing to the bailee from such premature termination should not exceed the benefit he has derived out of the bailment. If the loss exceeds the benefit, the bailor shall have to indemnify the bailee. The duty of a bailor for consideration is much greater. He is making profit from his profession and, therefore, it is his duty to see that the goods which he delivers are reasonably safe for the purpose of the bailment. It is no defence for him to say that he was not aware of the defect. However, the bailee is bound to bear ordinary and reasonable expenses of bailment, but for any extraordinary expenses, the bailor is responsible. It is the duty of the bailor to receive back the goods when the bailee returns them after the expiry of the term of the bailment or when the purpose for which the bailment was created has been accomplished. If the bailor refuses to receive back the goods, the bailee is entitled to receive compensation from the bailor, the necessary expenses of custody/storage. Where the title of the bailor to the goods is defective and the bailee suffers as a consequence, the bailor is responsible to the bailee and may, by reason, sustain that the bailor was not entitled to make bailment, or to receive back the goods, or to give directions respecting them. From the above discussion, it can be seen that bailment is a contract, whereby a delivery of possession is given of specific goods to another for some purpose with the direction that the goods shall be returned or disposed off on fulfillment of the purpose.Q.X & Y were close friends since childhood and both knew each other from skin to bone. X knew that Y was a ferocious horse-rider and out of habit, he tried to take every horse for a stride. X bought a horse and after taking it for rides came to know that the horse had developed an infection on his lower abdomen owing to which hitting it there would make it go wild which could be risky for a rider, particularly for a novice rider. Y, on seeing Xs horse, asked X to exchange it for the purpose of a countryside ride with Ys horse. X agreeded to the same. Y, out of habit again took this horse for a stride in the course of which he was hitting it on lower abdomen. The horse got wild and smashed Y on a rock which resulted in hospitalisation of Y. Y filed a claim for damages against X. Decide.a)Y will suceed in his claim as X failed to mention about the infection.b)Y will not succeed in his claim as he took the horse in exchange and not in bailment.c)Y will not succeed in his claim as the risk was for a novice rider and Y was doing horse-riding since long. Hence, Xs duty to mention about the infection does not arise in this case.d)Both [2] & [3]Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished.Contracts of bailment are a special class of contract. The circumstance in which this happens are numerous. Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines bailment as the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed off according to the directions of the person delivering them. According to Section 150 of the Indian Contract Act, which deals with the duties of bailor, bailors are of two kinds viz. 1) Gratuitous bailor 2) Bailor for reward/consideration. It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. A gratuitous bailment can be terminated by the bailor at any time even though the bailment was for a specified time or purpose. But in such a case, the loss accruing to the bailee from such premature termination should not exceed the benefit he has derived out of the bailment. If the loss exceeds the benefit, the bailor shall have to indemnify the bailee. The duty of a bailor for consideration is much greater. He is making profit from his profession and, therefore, it is his duty to see that the goods which he delivers are reasonably safe for the purpose of the bailment. It is no defence for him to say that he was not aware of the defect. However, the bailee is bound to bear ordinary and reasonable expenses of bailment, but for any extraordinary expenses, the bailor is responsible. It is the duty of the bailor to receive back the goods when the bailee returns them after the expiry of the term of the bailment or when the purpose for which the bailment was created has been accomplished. If the bailor refuses to receive back the goods, the bailee is entitled to receive compensation from the bailor, the necessary expenses of custody/storage. Where the title of the bailor to the goods is defective and the bailee suffers as a consequence, the bailor is responsible to the bailee and may, by reason, sustain that the bailor was not entitled to make bailment, or to receive back the goods, or to give directions respecting them. From the above discussion, it can be seen that bailment is a contract, whereby a delivery of possession is given of specific goods to another for some purpose with the direction that the goods shall be returned or disposed off on fulfillment of the purpose.Q.X & Y were close friends since childhood and both knew each other from skin to bone. X knew that Y was a ferocious horse-rider and out of habit, he tried to take every horse for a stride. X bought a horse and after taking it for rides came to know that the horse had developed an infection on his lower abdomen owing to which hitting it there would make it go wild which could be risky for a rider, particularly for a novice rider. Y, on seeing Xs horse, asked X to exchange it for the purpose of a countryside ride with Ys horse. X agreeded to the same. Y, out of habit again took this horse for a stride in the course of which he was hitting it on lower abdomen. The horse got wild and smashed Y on a rock which resulted in hospitalisation of Y. Y filed a claim for damages against X. Decide.a)Y will suceed in his claim as X failed to mention about the infection.b)Y will not succeed in his claim as he took the horse in exchange and not in bailment.c)Y will not succeed in his claim as the risk was for a novice rider and Y was doing horse-riding since long. Hence, Xs duty to mention about the infection does not arise in this case.d)Both [2] & [3]Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished.Contracts of bailment are a special class of contract. The circumstance in which this happens are numerous. Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines bailment as the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed off according to the directions of the person delivering them. According to Section 150 of the Indian Contract Act, which deals with the duties of bailor, bailors are of two kinds viz. 1) Gratuitous bailor 2) Bailor for reward/consideration. It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. A gratuitous bailment can be terminated by the bailor at any time even though the bailment was for a specified time or purpose. But in such a case, the loss accruing to the bailee from such premature termination should not exceed the benefit he has derived out of the bailment. If the loss exceeds the benefit, the bailor shall have to indemnify the bailee. The duty of a bailor for consideration is much greater. He is making profit from his profession and, therefore, it is his duty to see that the goods which he delivers are reasonably safe for the purpose of the bailment. It is no defence for him to say that he was not aware of the defect. However, the bailee is bound to bear ordinary and reasonable expenses of bailment, but for any extraordinary expenses, the bailor is responsible. It is the duty of the bailor to receive back the goods when the bailee returns them after the expiry of the term of the bailment or when the purpose for which the bailment was created has been accomplished. If the bailor refuses to receive back the goods, the bailee is entitled to receive compensation from the bailor, the necessary expenses of custody/storage. Where the title of the bailor to the goods is defective and the bailee suffers as a consequence, the bailor is responsible to the bailee and may, by reason, sustain that the bailor was not entitled to make bailment, or to receive back the goods, or to give directions respecting them. From the above discussion, it can be seen that bailment is a contract, whereby a delivery of possession is given of specific goods to another for some purpose with the direction that the goods shall be returned or disposed off on fulfillment of the purpose.Q.X & Y were close friends since childhood and both knew each other from skin to bone. X knew that Y was a ferocious horse-rider and out of habit, he tried to take every horse for a stride. X bought a horse and after taking it for rides came to know that the horse had developed an infection on his lower abdomen owing to which hitting it there would make it go wild which could be risky for a rider, particularly for a novice rider. Y, on seeing Xs horse, asked X to exchange it for the purpose of a countryside ride with Ys horse. X agreeded to the same. Y, out of habit again took this horse for a stride in the course of which he was hitting it on lower abdomen. The horse got wild and smashed Y on a rock which resulted in hospitalisation of Y. Y filed a claim for damages against X. Decide.a)Y will suceed in his claim as X failed to mention about the infection.b)Y will not succeed in his claim as he took the horse in exchange and not in bailment.c)Y will not succeed in his claim as the risk was for a novice rider and Y was doing horse-riding since long. Hence, Xs duty to mention about the infection does not arise in this case.d)Both [2] & [3]Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Bailment is a legal relationship in common law where physical possession but not ownership of personal property, or a chattel, is transferred from one person (the bailor) to another (the bailee) who subsequently has possession of the property. The bailee holds the personal property in trust for a specific purpose and delivers the property back to the bailor when the purpose is accomplished.Contracts of bailment are a special class of contract. The circumstance in which this happens are numerous. Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines bailment as the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed off according to the directions of the person delivering them. According to Section 150 of the Indian Contract Act, which deals with the duties of bailor, bailors are of two kinds viz. 1) Gratuitous bailor 2) Bailor for reward/consideration. It is the first and foremost duty of the bailor to disclose the faults about the goods bailed to the bailee. If he does not make such disclosure, he is responsible for any damage caused to the bailee directly from such faults. A gratuitous bailment can be terminated by the bailor at any time even though the bailment was for a specified time or purpose. But in such a case, the loss accruing to the bailee from such premature termination should not exceed the benefit he has derived out of the bailment. If the loss exceeds the benefit, the bailor shall have to indemnify the bailee. The duty of a bailor for consideration is much greater. He is making profit from his profession and, therefore, it is his duty to see that the goods which he delivers are reasonably safe for the purpose of the bailment. It is no defence for him to say that he was not aware of the defect. However, the bailee is bound to bear ordinary and reasonable expenses of bailment, but for any extraordinary expenses, the bailor is responsible. It is the duty of the bailor to receive back the goods when the bailee returns them after the expiry of the term of the bailment or when the purpose for which the bailment was created has been accomplished. If the bailor refuses to receive back the goods, the bailee is entitled to receive compensation from the bailor, the necessary expenses of custody/storage. Where the title of the bailor to the goods is defective and the bailee suffers as a consequence, the bailor is responsible to the bailee and may, by reason, sustain that the bailor was not entitled to make bailment, or to receive back the goods, or to give directions respecting them. From the above discussion, it can be seen that bailment is a contract, whereby a delivery of possession is given of specific goods to another for some purpose with the direction that the goods shall be returned or disposed off on fulfillment of the purpose.Q.X & Y were close friends since childhood and both knew each other from skin to bone. X knew that Y was a ferocious horse-rider and out of habit, he tried to take every horse for a stride. X bought a horse and after taking it for rides came to know that the horse had developed an infection on his lower abdomen owing to which hitting it there would make it go wild which could be risky for a rider, particularly for a novice rider. Y, on seeing Xs horse, asked X to exchange it for the purpose of a countryside ride with Ys horse. X agreeded to the same. Y, out of habit again took this horse for a stride in the course of which he was hitting it on lower abdomen. The horse got wild and smashed Y on a rock which resulted in hospitalisation of Y. Y filed a claim for damages against X. Decide.a)Y will suceed in his claim as X failed to mention about the infection.b)Y will not succeed in his claim as he took the horse in exchange and not in bailment.c)Y will not succeed in his claim as the risk was for a novice rider and Y was doing horse-riding since long. Hence, Xs duty to mention about the infection does not arise in this case.d)Both [2] & [3]Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev