Chapter -3

The Sale of Goods Act, 1930

UNIT -3
Transfer of Ownership and Delivery of
Goods

Ans:1
(a) The Statement is Incorrect: Where there is a contract for the sale of unascertained
(generic) goods, no property in the goods is transferred to the buyer unless and until the
goods are ascertained.

(b) The Statement is Incorrect: According to Section 2(4) of the sale of Goods Act, A railway
receipt is a "document of title" and it enables the consignee to give a valid discharge in
respect of the goods to which he relates.

(c) The Statement is Incorrect: Apart from any express contract, the seller of goods is not
bound to deliver the goods until and unless the buyer applies for delivery of the goods

(d) The Statement is Incorrect: According to Section 24(1) of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930,
the property passes only when he signifies is approval or Acceptance to seller or does any
other act adopting the transaction.

Ans:2 Exceptions to the Ruel “Nemo dat Quod Non Habet”: The term means, “none can give or
transfer goods what he does not himself own”.
Exceptions to the rule and the cases in which the Rule does not apply under the provisions
of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 are enumerated below:
(i) Effect of Estoppel (Section 27) : Where the owner is stopped by theconduct from denying
the seller’s authority to sell, the transferee will get a good title as against the true owner.
But before a good title by estoppel can be made, it must be shown that the true owner
had actively suffered or held out the other person is question as the true owner or as a
person authorized to sell the goods.
(ii) Sale by a Mercantile Agent: A sale made by a mercantile agent of the goods or document
of title to goods would pass a good title to the buyer in the following circumstances,
namely;
(a) If he was in possession of the goods or documents with the consentof the owner;
(b) If the sale was made by him when acting in the ordinary course ofbusiness as a
mercantile agent; and

1
 (c) If the buyer had acted in good faith and has at the time of the contract of sale, no
notice of the fact that the seller had no authority to sell.
(iii) Sale by one of the joint owners: If one of the several joint owners of goods has the sole
possession of them with the permission of the others, the property in the goods may be
transferred to any person who buys them from such a joint owner in good faith and does
not at the time of the contract of sale have notice that the seller has no authority to
sell. (Section 28)
(iv) Sale by a person in possession under voidable contract: A buyer would acquire a good title
to the goods sold to him by seller who had obtained possession of the goods under a
contract voidable on the ground of coercion, fraud, misrepresentation or undue influence
provided that the contract had not been rescinded until the time of the sale (Section 29).
(v) Sale by one who has already sold the goods but continues in possession thereof: If a
person has sold goods but continues to be in possession of them or of the documents of
title to them, he may sell them to a third person, and if such person obtains the delivery
thereof in good faith without notice of the previous sale, he would have good title to
them, although the property in the goods had passed to the first buyer earlier. A pledge
or other deposition of the goods or documents of title by the seller in possession are
equally valid. [Section30(1)]
(vi) Sale by buyer obtaining possession before the property in the goods has vested in him:
Where a buyer with the consent of seller obtains possession of the goods before the
property in them has passed to him, he may sell, pledge or otherwise dispose of the goods
to a third person, and if such person obtains delivery of the goods in good faith and
without notice of the lien or other right of the original seller in respect of the goods in
good faith and without notice of the lien or other right of the original seller in respect
of the goods, he would get a good title to them. [Section30(2)]
(vii) Sale by an unpaid seller: Where an unpaid seller who had exercised his right of lien or
stoppage in transit resells the goods, the buyer acquires a good title to the goods as
against the original buyer [Section54(3)]
(viii) Sale under the provisions of other Acts:
(a) Sale by an official Receiver or liquidator of the company will give the purchaser a
valid title.
(b) Purchase of goods from a finder of goods will get a valid title under circumstances.
(c) Sale by a pawnee under default of pawnor will give valid title to the purchaser.

2
Ans:3 Provision :The problem in this case is based on the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act,
1930 contained in the proviso to Section 27. The proviso provides that a mercantile agent
isone who in the customary course of his business, has, as such agent, authority either to
sell goods, or to consign goods, for thepurpose of sale, or to buy goods, or to raise money
on the security of goods [Section 2(9)].
The buyer of goods from a mercantile agent, who has no authority from the principal to
sell, gets a good title tothe goods if the following conditions are satisfied:
(1) The agent should be in possession of the goods or documents of title to the goods with
the consent of the owner.
(2) The agent should sell the goods while acting in the ordinary course of business of a
mercantile agent.
(3) The buyer should act in good faith.
(4) The buyer should not have at the time of the contract of sale notice that the agent has
no authority to sell.
Facts of Case : In the instant case, P, the agent, was in the possession of the car with
J’s consent for the purpose of sale. A, the buyer, therefore obtained a good title to the
car.
Conclusion : Hence, J in this case, cannot recover the car from A.

Ans:4 Provision :
Section 26 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 provides that unless otherwise agreed, the
goods remain at the seller’s risk until the property therein is transferred to the buyers,
but when the property therein is transferred to the buyer, the goods are at buyer’s risk
whether delivery has been made or not. Further Section 18 read with Section 23 of the
Act provide that in a contract for the sale of unascertained goods, no property in the
goods is transferred to the buyer, unless and until the goods are ascertained and where
there is contract for the sale of unascertained or future goods by description, and goods
of that description and in a deliverable state are unconditionally appropriated to the
contract, either by the seller with the assent of the buyer or by the buyer with the
assent of the seller, the property in the goods thereupon passes to the buyer.
Such assent may be express or implied.
Facts of Case : Mr. S agreed to purchase 100 bales of cotton from V, out of his large
stock andsent his men to take delivery of the goods. They could pack only 60 bales. Later

3
 on, there was an accidental fire and the entire stock was destroyed including 60 bales
that were already packed.
Conclusion : Applying the aforesaid law to the facts of the case in hand, it is clear that
Mr. S has the right to select the good out of the bulk and he has sent his men for same
purpose.
Hence the problem can be answered based on the following two assumptions and the
answer will vary accordingly.
(i) Where the bales have been selected with the consent of the buyer’s representatives: In
this case the 60 bales has been transferred to the buyer and goods have been
appropriated to the contract. Thus, loss arising due to fire in case of 60 bales would be
borne by Mr. S. As regards 40 bales, the loss would be borne by Mr. V, since the goods
have not been identified and appropriated.
(ii) Where the bales have not been selected with the representatives: In this case, the goods
has not been transferred at all and hence the loss of 100 bales would be borne by Mr. V
completely.

Ans:5 As per the provisions of Section 24 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, when goods are
delivered to the buyer on approval “on sale or return” or other similar terms, the property
therein passes to the buyer-
(a) when the buyer signifies his approval or acceptance to the seller or does any other act
adopting the transaction;
(b) if he does not signify his approval or acceptance to the seller but retains the goods
without giving notice of rejection, then, if a time has been fixed for the return of the
goods, on the expiration of such time, and, if no time has been fixed, on the expiration of
a reasonable time; or
(c) he does something to the good which is equivalent to accepting the goods e.g. he pledges
or sells the goods.
Referring to the above provisions, we can anal yse the situation given in the question:
(i) In the instant case, Ms. K, who had taken delivery of the two wheeler on Sale or Return
basis pledged the two wheeler to Mr. A, has attracted the third condition that she has
done something to the good which is equivalent to accepting the goods e.g. she pledges or
sells the goods. Therefore, the property therein (two wheeler) passes to Mr. A. Now in
this situation, Ms. R cannot claim back her two wheeler from Mr. A, but she can claim the
price of the two wheeler from Ms. K only.

4
 (ii) It may be noted that where the goods have been delivered by a person on “sale or return”
on the terms that the goods were to remain the property of the seller till they are paid
for, the property therein does not pass to the buyer until the terms are complied with,
i.e., price is paid for. Hence, in this case, it is held that at the time of pledge, the
ownership was not transferred to Ms. K. Thus, the pledge was not valid and Ms. R could
recover the two wheeler from Mr. A.

Ans:6 Section 26 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 provides that unless otherwise agreed, the
goods remain at the seller’s risk until the property therein is transferred to the buyer,
but when the property therein is transferred to the buyer, the goods are at buyer’s risk
whether delivery has been made or not. Further Section 18 read with Section 23 of the
Act provide that in a contract for the sale of unascertained goods, no property in the
goods is transferred to the buyer, unless and until the goods are ascertained and where
there is contract for the sale of unascertained or future goods by description, and goods
of that description and in a deliverable state are unconditionally appropriated to the
contract, either by the seller with the assent of the buyer or by the buyer with the
assent of the seller, the property in the goods thereupon passes to the buyer. Such assent
may be express or implied.
Applying the aforesaid law to the facts of the case in hand, it is clear that Mr. S has the
right to select the goods out of the bulk and he has sent his men for same purpose.
Hence the problem can be answered based on the following two assumptions and the
answer will vary accordingly.
(i) Where the bales have been selected with the consent of the buyer’s
representatives: In this case, the property in the 60 bales has been transferred to
the buyer and goods have been appropriated to the contract. Thus, loss arising due
to fire in case of 60 bales would be borne by Mr. S. As regards 40 bales, the loss
would be borne by Mr. V, since the goods have not been identified and appropriated.
(ii) Where the bales have not been selected with the consent of buyer’s
representatives: In this case, the property in the goods has not been transferred
at all and hence the loss of 100 bales would be borne by Mr. V completely.

5
Ans:7 Provision :
The problem in this case is based on the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930
contained in the proviso to Section 27. The proviso provides that a mercantile agent is
one who in the customary course of his business, has, as such agent, authority either to
sell goods, or to consign goods, for the purpose of sale, or to buy goods, or to raise money
on the security of goods [Section 2(9)].
The buyer of goods from a mercantile agent, who has no authority from the principal to
sell, gets a good title to the goods if the following conditions are satisfied:
(1) The agent should be in possession of the goods or documents of title to the goods
with the consent of the owner.
(2) The agent should sell the goods while acting in the ordinary course of business of
mercantile agent.
(3) The buyer should act in good faith.
(4) The buyer should not have at the time of the contract of sale notice that the agent
has no authority to sell.
Facts of Case :
J the owner of a Fiat car wants to sell his car. For this purpose he hand over the car to
P, a mercantile agent for sale at a price not less than Rs. 50, 000. The agent sells the car
for Rs. 40, 000 to A, who buys the car in good faith and without notice of any fraud. P
misappropriated the money also. J sues A to recover the Car.
Conclusion:
In the instant case, P, the agent, was in the possession of the car with J’s consent for
the purpose of sale. A, the buyer, therefore obtained a good title to the car. Hence, J in
this case, cannot recover the car from A.

Ans:8 Provision :
As per the provisions of section 24 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, when goods are
delivered to the buyer on approval or “on sale or return" or other similar terms, the
property therein passes to the buyer-
(a) When the buyer signifies his approval or acceptance to the seller or does any other act
adopting the transaction;
(b) if he does not signify his approval or acceptance to the seller but retains the goods
without giving notice of rejection, then, if a time has been fixed for the return of the

6
 goods, on the expiration of such time, and, if no time has been fixed, on the expiration of
a reasonable time; or
(c) He does something to the good which is equivalent to accepting the goods e.g. he pledges
or sells the goods.
Facts of Case :
Ms. Preeti owned a motor car which she handed over to Mr. Joshi on sale or return basis.
After a week, Mr. Joshi pledged the motor car to Mr.Ganesh. Ms. Preeti now claims back
the motor car from Mr. Ganesh.
Conclusion:
Referring to the above provisions, we can analyse the situation given in the question.
Since, Mr. Joshi, who had taken delivery of the Motor car on Sale or Return basis and
pledged the motor car to Mr. Ganesh, has attracted the third condition that he has done
something to the good which is equivalent to accepting the goods e.g. he pledges or sells
the goods. Therefore, the property therein (Motor car) passes to Mr. Joshi.
Now in this situation, Ms. Preeti cannot claim back her Motor Car from Mr. Ganesh, but
she can claim the price of the motor car from Mr. Joshi only.

Ans:9
(i) In accordance with the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 as contained in Section
7, a contract for the sale of specific goods is void if at the time when the contract was
made; the goods without the knowledge of the seller, perished or become so damaged as
no longer to answer to their description in the contract, then the contract is void ab initio.
This section is based on the rule that where both the parties to a contract are under a
mistake as to a matter of fact essential to a contract, the contract is void.
(ii) In a similar way Section 8 provides that an agreement to sell specific goods becomes void
if subsequently the goods, without any fault on the part of the seller or buyer, perish or
become so damaged as no longer to answer to their description in agreement before the
risk passes to the buyer. It may, however, be noted that section 7 & 8 apply only to
specific goods and not to unascertained goods. If the agreement is to sell a certain
quantity of unascertained goods, the perishing of even the whole quantity of such goods
in the possession of the seller will not relieve him of his obligation to deliver the goods.

7
Ans:10 The Sale of Goods Act prescribes the following rules of delivery of goods:
(i) Effect of Part delivery: A delivery of part of goods, in progress of delivery of the whole
has the some effect (for the purpose of passing of property in such goods )as delivery of
the whole.
(ii) Buyer to apply for delivery: Apart from any express contract the seller of goods is not
bound to deliver them, until the buyer applies for delivery.
(iii) Place of delivery: Where it is for the buyer to take possession of the goods or for the
seller to send them to buyer is a question depending in each case on the contract between
the parties.
(iv) Time of delivery: Where under the contract of sale , the seller is bound to sell the goods
to the buyer but no time for sending them is fixed, the seller is bound to send them
within reasonable time.
(v) Goods in possession of a third party: Where the goods at the time of sale are in possession
of a third person, there is no delivery unless and until such third person acknowledges to
the buyer that he holds the goods on his behalf.
(vi) Time for tender of delivery: Demand or tender of delivery may be treated as ineffectual
unless made at a reasonable hour.
(vii) Expenses for delivery: The expenses of and incidental to putting the goods into a
deliverable state must be born by the seller, in the absence of a contract to the contrary.
(viii) Instalment deliveries: Unless otherwise agreed, the buyer is not bound to accept delivery
in instalments. The rights and liabilities in Cases of delivery by instalments and payments
there for may be determined by the by contract
(ix) Deterioration during transit: Where goods are delivered at a distant place, the liability
for deterioration necessarily incidental to the course of transit will fall on the buyer,
though the seller agrees to deliver at his own risk.
(x) Buyer's right to examine the goods: Where goods are delivered to the buyer, who has not
previously examined them, he is entitled to a reasonable opportunity of examining them
in order to ascertain whether they are in conformity with the contract. Unless otherwise
agreed, the seller is bound on request, to afford the buyer a reasonable opportunity of
examining the goods.

8
Ans:11 Provision: According to Section 28 of the Sales of Goods Act, sale by one of the several
joint owners is valid if the following conditions are satisfied:-
(i) One of the several joint owners has the sole possession of them.
(ii) Possession of the goods is by the permission of the co-owners.
(iii) The buyer buys them in good faith and has not at the time of contract of sale knowledge
that the seller has no authority to sell.
Facts of Case:
In the above case, A, B and C were the joint owners of the truck and the possession of
the truck was with B. Now B sold the said truck to X. X without knowing this fact
purchased the truck from B.
Conclusion:
The sale between B and X is perfectly valid because Section 28 of the Sales of Goods Act
provides that in case one of the several joint owners has the possession of the goods by
the permission of the co-owners and if the buyer buys them in good faith without the
knowledge of the fact that seller has no authority to sell, it will give rise to a valid
contract of sale.

Ans:12 Passing of the risk in the property to the buyer of goods:

(i) The general rule is, "Unless otherwise agreed, the goods remain at the seller's risk until
the property therein is transferred to the buyer, after that event they are at buyers
risk, whether delivery has been made or not.
(ii) If delivery has been delayed through the fault of either buyer or seller, the goods shall
be at the risk of the party in default.
(iii) Duties and liabilities of seller or buyer as bailee of goods for other partyremain
unaffected even when the risk has passed generally.

Ans:13 Provision:
Payment and Delivery are Concurrent Condition (Section 32) :
(i) Unless otherwise agreed, delivery of goods and payment of price are concurrent
conditions.
(ii) The seller shall be ready and willing to give to possession and the buyer shall be ready
and willing to pay the price, in exchange of goods.

9
 Facts of Case :
In the given case, X has agreed to purchase 300 tons of wheat from Y out of a larger
stock. X sent his men (agent) to put the wheat in the sacks.
Out of 300 tones only 150 tons were put into the sacks. There was a sudden fire and the
entire stock was gutted. In this case, according to the provisions of law, 150 tons sale has
taken place. So, buyer X will be responsible tobear the loss. The loss of rest of the wheat
will be that of the seller Y.
Conclusion :
The wheat which was put in the sacks fulfils both the conditions that are:-
(1) The wheat is put in a deliverable state in the sacks.
(2) The buyer is presumed to have knowledge of it because the men who put the wheat
in the sacks are that of the buyer.

Ans:14 The section says that unless otherwise agreed the delivery of the goods and payment of
the price are concurrent conditions that is to say, the seller shall be ready and willing to
give possession of the goods to the buyer in exchange for the price, and the buyer shall
be ready and willing to pay the price in exchange for possession of goods.
The general rule is that the obligations of the seller to deliver and that of the buyer to
pay are implied concurrent conditions in the nature of mutual conditions precedent, and
that neither can enforce that contract against the other without showing performance
or offering to perform of averring readiness and willingness to perform his own promise.
This section lays down the rule as regards what are known as reciprocal promises to be
simultaneously performed. In such a case no promisor need perform his promise unless
the promise is ready and willing to perform his reciprocal promise.

Ans:15 When goods are delivered to the buyer on approval or other similar terms, the properly
therein passes to the buyer :
1. When he signifies his approval or acceptance to the seller, or does any other act adopting
the transaction, or
2. If he does not signify his approval or acceptance to the seller, but retain the goods
without giving notice of rejection then if a time has been fixed for the return of the
goods on expiration of such time. If no time has been fixed on expiration of reasonable
time.
3. He does something to the good, which is equivalent to accepting the goods .

10
Ans:16 Provision :
According to Section 24 of the Sales of Goods Act, 1930, in case of delivery of goods on
approval basis, the property in goods passes from seller to the buyer:-
(i) When the person to whom the goods are given either accepts them or does an act
which implies adopting the transaction.
(ii) When the person to whom the goods are given retains the goods without giving his
approval or giving notice of rejection beyond the time fixed for the return of goods
and in case no time is fixed after the lapse of reasonable time.
Facts of Case :
In the given case, seller has delivered 20 tables to the buyer on sale or return basis.
Buyer received the tables without examining them. Out of these 20 tables, he sold 5
tables to his customer. It implies that he has accepted 5 tables out of 20. When the
buyer received the complaint of some defect in the tables, he wanted to return all the
tables to the seller.
Conclusion :
According to the provisions of law he is entitled to return only 15 tables to the seller and
not those 5 tables which he has already sold to his customer.
These tables are already accepted by him so the buyer becomes liable under the doctrine
of “Caveat Emptor”.

Ans:17 A delivered the horse to B on sale or return basis. It was decided between them that B
will try the horse for 8 days and in case he does not like it, he will return the horse to
the owner A. But on the third day the horse died without any fault of B. The time given
by the seller A to the buyer B has not expired yet. Therefore, the ownership of the horse
still belongs to the seller A. B will be considered as the owner of the horse only when B
does not return the horse to A within stipulated time of 8 days. The suit filed by A for
the recovery of price from B is invalid and he cannot recover the price from B.

Ans:18 Subject to provision of the act and any other law for time being in force where goods are
sold by person who is not the owner thereof and who does not sell them under authority
or with consent of owner , the buyer acquires no better title to the goods than the seller
had, unless the owner of the goods is by his conduct precluded from denying the seller
authority to sell.

11
 1. The general rule regarding the transfer of title is seller cannot transfer to buyer of
goods a better title than he himself has.
2. If seller is not owner of goods then buyer will not become the owner this rule is expressed
in Latin Maxim “Nemo dat quod non habet” which means that no one can give what he has
not got.

Ans:19 When the seller is ready and willing to deliver the goods and requests the buyer to take
delivery, and the buyer does not within a reasonable time after such a request take
delivery of the goods, he is liable to the seller for any loss occasioned by his neglect or
refusal to take delivery and also for a reasonable charge for the care and custody of the
goods. Provided that nothing in this section shall affect the rights of the seller where
the neglect or refusal of the buyer to take delivery amounts to a repudiation of the
contract.Thus, in the given case, Mr. D can recover damages from Mr. E and can repudiate
the contract as well.

Ans:20 According to the facts of this case it stands pretty much clear to the judgment of an
independent observer that the property in the goods sold by Mr. G had already passed to
Mr. H after the payment of dues and the examination of goods by the agent of Mr. H.
Hence it can be easily concluded that the liability for damage suffered by the goods would
fall on the buyer i.e. Mr. H and not Mr. G since the transfer of title of the goods had
already taken place before the damage occurred.

Ans:21
(a) There is a contract for the sale of unascertained or future goods
(b) The goods should conform to the description and quality stated in contract.
(c) The goods must be in a deliverable state.
(d) The goods must be unconditionally appropriated to the contract either by delivery to the
buyer or his agent or the carrier.
(e) The appropriation must be made by:
(i) The seller with the assent of the buyer, or
(ii) The buyer with the assent of the seller
(f) The assent may be express or implied.
(g) The assent may be given either before or after appropriation.

12
Ans:22 Provision :
When the goods are delivered to the buyer on approval or on sale or return basis or other
similar terms the property there in passes to the buyer.
(a) When he signifies his approval or acceptance to the seller or does any other act adopting
the transaction.
(b) If he does not signify his approval or acceptance to the seller but retains the goods on
the expiration of such time, if no time has been fixed, then on the expiration of the
reasonable time.
(c) He does something to the goods which is equivalent to accepting the goods.But sometimes,
it may be noted that where goods have been delivered by a person on ‘Sale or return’ on
the terms that the goods well to remain the property of the sellers till they are paid for,
the property therein does not pass to the buyer until the terms are complied with i.e.
cash in paid for.
Facts of Case :
In the given case Mr. R Owns a two-wheeler which she handed over to her friend MSK on
sale or return basis. After a week MSK neither returned the vehicle nor made payment
for it. She instead pledge the vehicle to Mrs. A to obtain a loan.
Conclusion :
(i) Thus, according to this case Mr. R has no right against Mr. A. He can only recover
the price of the two wheeler from Mr. K.
(ii) Yes, my answer will be different if it had been expressly provided that the vehicle
would remain the property of Mr. R until the price has been paid then it says that at
the time of pledge the ownership was not transferred to Mr. K. Thus, the pledge was
not valid and R can recover from the two wheeler from A as well.

Ans:23 Provision :
Where there is a contract of sale of goods by description, there is an implied condition
that the goods shall correspond with the description.
This rule is based on the principle that "if you contract to sell peas, you cannot compel
the buyer to take beans."
The buyer is not bound to accept and pay for the goods which are not in accordance with
the description of goods.

13
 Facts of Case :
Here in the given problem, Mr. M went to Mr. T's shop and asked for exhaust fan and
approved a particular brand and paid for it. The fan which was delivered at M's house was
a table fan. So, he asked Mr. T to exchange the same but Mr. T refused to do so.
Conclusion : Applying the above legal provision is the given problem we can conclude as
follows:
(1) Mr. T is not right he can't refuse to exchange the fan as the goods are not according
to description. Buyer has asked for exhaust fan and seller has supplied table fan
condition as to description is breached.
(2) Remedy available to Mr. M- Mr. M can repudiate / rescind the contract i.e. he can
return the table fan and ask for damages or both.

Ans:24 Provision :
As per the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 there are three modes of delivery,
i) Actual delivery,
ii) Constructive delivery and
iii) Symbolic delivery. When delivery is affected without any change in the custody or
actual possession of the things, it is called constructive delivery or delivery by
acknowledgement. Constructive delivery takes place when a person in possession of goods
belonging to seller acknowledges to the buyer that he is holding the goods on buyer’s
behalf.
Facts of Case :
Avyukt purchased 100 Kgs of wheat from Bhaskar at Rs.30 per kg. Bhaskar says that
wheat is in his warehouse in the custody of Kishore, the warehouse keeper. Kishore
confirmed Avyukt that he can take the delivery of wheat from him and till then he is
holding wheat on Avyukt’s behalf. Before Avyukt picks the goods from warehouse, the
whole wheat in the warehouse has flowed in flood. Now Avyukt wants his price on the
contention that no delivery has been done by seller.
Conclusion :
On the basis of above provisions and facts, it is clear that possession of the wheat has
been transferred through constructive delivery. Hence, Avyukt is not right. He cannot
claim the price back.

14
Ans:25 Provision :
As per the Proviso to Section 27 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, a sale made by a
mercantile agent of the goods would pass a good title to the buyer in the following
circumstances; namely;
(a) If he was in possession of the goods or documents with the consent of the owner;
(b) If the sale was made by him when acting in the ordinary course of business as a
mercantile agent; and
(c) If the buyer had acted in good faith and has at the time of the contract of sale, no
notice of the fact that the seller had no authority to sell.
Facts of Case :
On the basis of above, it can be said that Ravi, the mercantile agent, sells property to
Mudit who bought in good faith. Mudit obtained a good title of that residential property.
Conclusion :
Hence, Ayushman cannot recover his property from Mudit. Rather, Ayushman can recover
his loss from Ravi.

Ans:26 Provision :
According to the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, there are three modes of
delivery,
(i) Actual delivery,
(ii) Constructive delivery and
(iii) Symbolic delivery.
Symbolic delivery is a delivery of a thing in token of a transfer of something else, i.e.,
delivery of goods in the course of transit may be made by handing over documents of title
to goods, like bill of lading or railway receipt or delivery orders or the key of a warehouse
containing the goods is handed over to buyer.
Facts of Case :
In the instant case, Samar purchased a pre-owned car from “Car Wala 007” which was
standing in the parking lane just outside of office. After completing the documenting
formalities, he received the key of car from sales manager of “Car Wala 007”. But when
he was coming to parking area for picking the car, the car which badly damaged due to
fall of the electric poll on the car.

15
Conclusion :
On the basis of above provisions and facts, it is clear that handing over the key of car is
the symbolic delivery of car. Hence, Samar being owner of the car must bear the repair
expenses of car.

16