You are on page 1of 8

DUTIES OF BAILOR

• SECTION 150 DEALS WITH DUTIES OF


BAILOR.
• T O D I S C L O S E K N O W N FA C T S : T H E
BAILOR SHOULD DISCLOSE THE
K N O W N FA U LT S A B O U T T H E G O O D S ,
WHICH HE/SHE HAS BAILED TO
BAILEE. IF THE BAILOR DOES NOT
DISCLOSE THE DEFECTS THEN
HE/SHE IS LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE
C A U S E D T O T H E B A I L E E D U E TO
SUCH DEFECTS IN THE GOODS.
• Illustration: A lends a horse, which he known to be
vicious, to B. He does not disclose the fact that the
horse is vicious. The horse runs away. B is thrown and
injured. A is responsible to B for damage sustained.
• Bailment of reward: It carries a greater responsibility on
the Part of bailor. He will be liable even if he as not in
the know of the defects.
• Illustration: A hire a carriage of B, The carriage is
unsafe, though B is not aware of it, and A is injured. B
is still responsible to A for the injury.
• Duty to repay bailee’s expenses: A bailor is duty bound
to repay to the bailee expenses incurred by him for
work done on the goods received under conditions of
bailment, and for which he is not receiving any
remuneration or deriving any benefit.
• Duty to indemnify the bailee: The bailor is bound to
make good the loss suffered by the bailee that is in
excess of the benefit actually derived, where he had
delivered the goods gratuitously and compelled the
bailee to return them before the expiry of the period of
bailment.
• Duty to compensate bailee for breach of warranty:
Every contract of Bailment warrants the bailee about the
bailor’s title being defect free, Thus, if bailee suffers
any loss due to bailor’s title being defective, it is the
duty of the bailor to compensate the bailee for breach of
warranty
• Duty to claim back the goods
• Duty to indemnify the bailee: The bailor is bound to
make goods the loss suffered by the bailee
RIGHTS OF THE BAILOR

• If bailee does not take care and destruction of good takes


place, bailer can claim compensation.
• If bailee uses the goods for un-authorized purposes, bailor has the
right to claim compensation.
• Bailor has the right to claim return of goods.
• Bailor has right to claim not only delivered goods but also
accruals on good if any.
• In case where bailee has mixed the goods and they are of
sufferable nature, bailer can claim cost of separation from bailee.
• In case where the goods are of insufferable nature,
bailer has right to claim compensation
• Bailor has right to repudiate the contract of bailment
whenever he wants but, by doing so, if bailee comes
across any suffering, bailor has to compensate
DUTIES OF BAILEE

• To take reasonable care of the goods: It is the duty of the bailee to take
reasonable care of the goods bailed to him/her by the bailor. According to
section 151 of the Indian contract act 1872, the bailee is to take care of the
goods as a man of ordinary prudence would, under similar circumstances, take
care of his own goods of the same bulk, quality and value as the goods bails”.
Section 152 states that If, In spite of taking all reasonable care, the goods are
damaged or destroyed in any way, then the bailee is not liable for the loss,
destruction or the deterioration of the goods bailed.
• In Coldman vs Hill (1919) 1 K.B. 443 : In this case some cattle belonging to A
were given to B for feeding them grass against payment. Without any
negligence on the part of B the cattle were stolen. B did not inform the owner
or the police or make any effort to recover the cattle, because he thought it
would be useless to do so. It was held by the Court that B was liable for the
loss to A.
• Not to make any unauthorized use of goods: The bailee is not to use goods in a
manner, which is inconsistent with the terms of the contract. If he/she uses the
goods in an inconsistent manner then he/she is liable for loss of or any damage
to the goods bailed.
• Not to mix goods bailed with his/her own goods: The bailee is to keep the
goods bailed to him/her separately from his/her own goods.
• To return the goods
• In Shaw& Co. vs. Symmons & Sons (1917 )1K.B. 799: A delivered some
books to B for binding. He pressed for their return, but B neglected to return
them although more than a reasonable time had elapsed. A fire accidently
broke out on B’s premises, and the books were destroyed. He held, B was
liable for the loss, although he was not negligent, because of his failure to
deliver the books within a reasonable time.
• Bailee should not setup adverse title.

You might also like