The case of Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s. Girdharilal Parshottamdas is a significant judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India in 1966. This case pertains to issues related to the sale of goods, specifically, the passing of property and risk in a contract for the sale of goods.
Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s. Girdharilal Parshottamdas & Co., AIR 1966 SC 543
Facts of the Case:
The case involved a dispute between Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia (the appellant) and M/s. Girdharilal Parshottamdas & Co. (the respondent). The dispute centered around a contract for the sale of goods, which included a consignment of groundnut oil.
The appellant, Bhagwandas, was the buyer, and the respondent, Girdharilal Parshottamdas & Co., was the seller. The contract stipulated that the goods would be shipped by rail, and payment would be made against railway receipt and the bill of lading. The goods were shipped accordingly, and the railway receipt and bill of lading were handed over to the appellant’s agent.
However, before the appellant could take delivery of the goods, they were destroyed in a fire accident at the railway station. The appellant refused to make payment for the goods, claiming that the property in the goods had not passed to him at the time of the accident. The respondent initiated legal proceedings to recover the price of the goods.
Legal Issue: Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s. Girdharilal Parshottamdas & Co., AIR 1966 SC 543
The primary legal issue in this case was whether the property in the goods had passed to the buyer, Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia, at the time of the fire accident, which would determine the party responsible for the loss.
Court’s Decision: Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s. Girdharilal Parshottamdas & Co., AIR 1966 SC 543
The Supreme Court, in its judgment, held that the property in the goods had passed to the buyer at the time of the fire accident. The court analyzed the terms of the contract, the delivery of documents (railway receipt and bill of lading), and the intention of the parties.
The court noted that the contract provided for payment against the railway receipt and bill of lading, which are documents of title to the goods. Delivery of these documents to the appellant’s agent was considered symbolic delivery of the goods themselves. As a result, the property in the goods had passed to the appellant upon the delivery of these documents, even though physical delivery had not occurred.
Since the property had passed to the appellant, he was held responsible for the risk of loss, and he was obligated to make payment for the destroyed goods.
Key Takeaways: Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s. Girdharilal Parshottamdas
- Passing of Property: The case highlights the significance of understanding when the property in goods passes from the seller to the buyer in a contract for the sale of goods. The passing of property determines ownership and risk.
- Symbolic Delivery: In cases involving documents of title to goods, delivery of these documents can be treated as symbolic delivery of the goods themselves, leading to the passing of property.
- Intention of the Parties: The court considered the intention of the parties as evidenced by the terms of the contract and the delivery of documents to determine when the property passed.
- Risk Allocation: Determining the point at which property passes also determines which party bears the risk of loss in case of damage or destruction of the goods.
In Conclusion, – Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s. Girdharilal Parshottamdas & Co., AIR 1966 SC 543
Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s. Girdharilal Parshottamdas & Co. is a significant case that clarifies the principles regarding the passing of property in a contract for the sale of goods. It emphasizes the importance of contractual terms, delivery of documents, and the intention of the parties in determining when property passes and, consequently, who bears the risk of loss.
Visits
Ask Akash – Case Summary, Knowledge, Rights
Last minute revision :- Indian Penal Code summary 2023 : topper tips to become ranker – Ask Akash
Important Landmark Cases : Indian Constitution 2023 – Ask Akash
ask akash (@asklegalakash) / X (twitter.com)
https://askakash.com/bcci-vs-cricket-association-of-bihar-summary/
BCCI vs Cricket association of Bihar summary 2015| Important case of the Future of Bihar Cricket |
BCI Exam 2023 | Important provisions and points for crack exam |
IND vs Pak 2023 | Most Important Match | 10 sept
Keshavananda Bharati Vs Union of India (UOI) 1973 | Most Important case of Indian Constitution
