case study of sales of goods

Case Analysis: Sujanmal v/s Radhey Shyam Agrawal

• Whether the defendants committed breach of contract and
• If the breach had been committed, what is the date of such breach?
• Reasonable time for performance of contract. Though this issue was not raised by the parties to the contract, the court took Suo Moto to determine the time as to the performance. The court depended upon the facts of the case for this. The distance between the defendant's firm and place of delivery was 12 miles and the stock was already available. So, the reasonable time was found to be 1 month.  Analysis: Although ignored, but it is a very crucial point as when the contract is not performed within a reasonable time, it might frustrate the whole objective of the contract. If the defendant had not asked for payment in advance, the contract might have been performed after that day. As the price of Rasada Vanaspati increased with effect from 14/02/64, the plaintiff would have suffered huge losses. Therefore, the court took justified step in determining the reasonable time.  
• Non-payment- When the buyer denies paying for goods after the delivery.
• Violation of Condition- If the contract is based on certain condition/conditions and that condition is breached, the contract is said to be breached.
• Violation of Warranty- Warranty is a stipulation collateral to the main purpose of contract. If the warranty is breached, the contract is deemed to be breached.
• Installment deliveries- If the delivery is to be made in installment and the buyer refuses to pay for a certain in tustallment or all the installments or the seller makes defective delivery in one or more installments, the contract is breached.
• Non-acceptance of good- When the buyer refuses or neglects the delivery of goods, the contract is breached on his part.
• Non-delivery of good- If the seller does not deliver the goods to the buyer after entering into a contract, the contract is breached on his part.
• Payment and Delivery are concurrent conditions The court referred to Section 32 of the act and held that the plaintiffs did not show readiness and willingness to pay. Analysis: The plaintiffs can argue against this point by saying that they were ready and willing to pay as if not, they would never have been entered into the contract of sale. The point is nevertheless correct but after receiving the letter asking for payment in advance, they were bound to expressly show their readiness and willingness. Had the letter for advance payment not been sent to them, it was not required of them to show express willingness as it was already implied. However, they could still not blame the defendants for breach because they had not applied for delivery which is a necessary condition as per Section 35.  
• The Sale of Goods Act, 1949, � 32, No. 3, Acts of Parliament, 1930 (India).
• Indian Contract Act, 1872 � 3, No. 9, Acts of Parliament, 1872 (India).
• Sujanmal v. Radhey Shyam Agrawal, AIR 1976 Raj 98.
• Firm Birdhi Chand v. Ramdeo, 1970 RLW 148=ILR 1969 19 Raj. 481.
• Jai Mishra, Breach of Contract under Sale of Goods Act,1930, Legal Services India (Mar. 25, 2022, 12:22 PM), https://legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-4303-breach-of-cpntract-under-sale-of-goods-act-1930.html.

Law Article in India

Please drop your comments, you may like.

Mental Harassment at Workpl...

Legal Validity of Trademark...

The Role Of Legal Aid In Pr...

Introduction to the Menaka ...

Critical Analysis Of The Ch...

Trademark Registration in I...

Legal question & answers, lawyers in india - search by city.

Law Articles

How to file for mutual divorce in delhi.

How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi Mutual Consent Divorce is the Simplest Way to Obtain a D...

Increased Age For Girls Marriage

It is hoped that the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021, which intends to inc...

Facade of Social Media

One may very easily get absorbed in the lives of others as one scrolls through a Facebook news ...

Section 482 CrPc - Quashing Of FIR: Guid...

The Inherent power under Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (37th Chapter of t...

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in India: A...

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a concept that proposes the unification of personal laws across...

Role Of Artificial Intelligence In Legal...

Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing various sectors of the economy, and the legal i...

File caveat In Supreme Court Instantly

• The Courts Today By LatestLaws.com| 25.06.2024 |
• 3rd National Moot Court Competition by JIS University, Kolkata [In-person; July 29; Cash Prizes Upto Rs. 25k]: Register by July 25!
• अदालत ने सनातन धर्म टिप्पणी मामले में उदयनिधि स्टालिन को मिली सशर्त जमानत
• 23rd Henry Dunant Memorial Moot Court Competition 2024 by ISIL and ICRC, New Delhi [Sept 20-22]: Register by June 28
• वकीलों ने एसपी कार्यालय में किया प्रदर्शन
• NEET पेपर लीक मामले में कोर्ट का आदेश: संजीव मुखिया की जमानत पर CBI की विशेष अदालत में होगी सुनवाई
• हरियाणा सरकार को सुप्रीम कोर्ट से बड़ा झटका, नौकरियों में 5 नंबर बोनस देने का फैसला रद्द
• अरविंद केजरीवाल को हाईकोर्ट से झटका, हाईकोर्ट का जमानत देने से इनकार
• US Court dismisses racial discrimination case against Uber
• Jet Airways के संस्थापक नरेश गोयल ने हाईकोर्ट का रुख किया, अंतरिम चिकित्सा जमानत बढ़ाने की अपील
• पुणे पोर्श कार दुर्घटना मामले में आरोपी नाबालिग को जमानत, हाईकोर्ट का बड़ा फैसला
• Pune Porsche crash: Bombay HC orders release of accused Teen, to be in custody of Aunt
• हाईकोर्ट: जमानत दस्तावेजों पर पुलिस-कोर्ट के सामने हस्ताक्षर जरूरी नहीं, विदेश में रह रही बुजुर्ग को राहत
• सुप्रीम कोर्ट का निर्देश: सत्येंद्र जैन की जमानत याचिका पर नौ जुलाई को फैसला सुनाए हाईकोर्ट
• Jet Airways founder Naresh Goyal moves Bombay HC seeking extension of interim medical bail

• Central Acts
• Latest News
• Corporate Law News
• Human Rights News
• Intellectual Property News
• Did you Know?
• International News
• हिंदी न्यूज़
• Law Firm News
• Marriage and Divorce News
• Tourism News
• World of Petroleum & Natural Gas
• Case Analysis Supreme Court High Courts Tribunal Courts
• Cheque Bounce News
• Legal Services News
• Petroleum News

Supreme Court Judgments

• Supreme Court

High Court Judgments

• Delhi High Court
• Allahabad High Court
• Bombay High Court
• Calcutta High Court
• Madras High Court
• Punjab & Haryana High Court
• Andhra High Court
• Chattisgarh High Court
• Gauhati High Court
• Gujarat High Court
• Himachal Pradesh High Court
• Jammu & Kashmir High Court
• Jharkhand High Court
• Karnataka High Court
• Kerala High Court
• Madhya Pradesh High Court
• Meghalaya High Court
• Manipur High Court
• Orissa High Court
• Patna High Court
• Rajasthan High Court
• Sikkim High Court
• Tripura High Court
• Telangana High Court
• Uttarakhand High Court
• Arbitration
• Conciliation

Campus Buzz

• Call for Papers
• Conferences & Seminars
• Courses & Workshops
• Debate Competitions
• Essay Competitions
• Fellowships
• Fests, MUNs and Other Competitions
• International Opportunities
• Internships
• Moot Court Competitions
• Scholarships
• Legal Documents
• Legal Forms for Advocates
• Legal Dictionary
• SC Collegium Resolutions
• Law Commission of India Reports
• NCRB Reports
• Justice Verma Committee Report, 2013
• Justice BN Srikrishna Report on Institutionalisation of Arbitration
• Legal Maxims
• Web Links Directory

Legal Education

• Law School Entrance Exams
• Law Schools and Colleges in India
• Overseas Law Schools
• Careers in Law

Circulars & Notices

• RBI Circulars
• RBI Notices
• SEBI Circulars
• SEBI Notices
• MCA Circulars
• MCA Notices
• Supreme Court Calendar 2023
• Supreme Court Bar Association
• Supreme Court Advocate-On-Record
• All High Courts Calendar
• High Courts Portals
• Judicial Exam Notice Board
• Judicial Services Exam Question Papers
• Bar Councils
• Bar Associations

Central Acts Categories

Supreme court (sc) judgements on sale of goods act, 1930.

List of Judgements

Coal india ltd. and anr. vs. competition commission of india and anr..

Judgement Date : june/2023 , Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 529 SC

Tata Motors Ltd.Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes(SPL) & Anr.

Judgement Date : may/2023 , Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 490 SC

D. N. Singh v Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr.

Judgement Date : may/2023 , Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 484 SC

The Commissioner of Service Tax Delhi Vs. Quick Heal Technologies Ltd.

Judgement Date : august/2022 , Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 615 SC

Judgement Date : august/2022 , Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 614 SC

Competition Commission of India Vs. State of Mizoram

Judgement Date : january/2022 , Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 67 SC

State of Uttar Pradesh through Secretary (Excise) Vs. M/s. Mcdowell and Company Ltd.

Judgement Date : january/2022 , Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 16 SC

Forum for People's Collective Efforts (FPCE) Vs. State of West Bengal

Judgement Date : april/2021 , Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 234 SC

M/s. Vellanki frame works Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam

Judgement Date : january/2021 , Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 21 SC

SURENDRA KUMAR BHILAWE vs. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

Judgement Date : june/2020 , Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 405 SC

PANDURANG GANPATI CHAUGULE vs. VISHWASRAO PATIL MURGUD SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED

Judgement Date : may/2020 , Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 356 SC

COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER vs. M/S BOMBAY MACHINERY STORE

Judgement Date : april/2020 , Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 344 SC

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPUR vs. M/S UNIVERSAL FERRO & ALLIED CHEMICALS LTD.

Judgement Date : march/2020 , Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 256 SC

INTERNET AND MOBILE ASSOCIATION OF INDIA vs. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA

Judgement Date : march/2020 , Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 238 SC

ASSISTANT ENGINEER (D1) AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED vs. RAHAMATULLAH KHAN ALIAS RAHAMJULLA

Judgement Date : february/2020 , Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 177 SC

M/S SHANTI CONDUCTORS (P) LTD vs. ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

Judgement Date : december/2019 , Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 1288 SC

GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD. vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Judgement Date : december/2019 , Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 1193 SC

STATE OF WEST BENGAL vs. CALCUTTA CLUB LIMITED

Judgement Date : october/2019 , Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 943 SC

NEVADA PROPERTIES PVT. LTD vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Judgement Date : september/2019 , Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 865 SC

M/s. D.J. Malpani Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik

Judgement Date : april/2019 , Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 357 SC

Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (UHBVNL) Vs. Adani Power Ltd.

Judgement Date : february/2019 , Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 170 SC

M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (SPL)

Judgement Date : february/2019 , Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 88 SC

State of Karnataka and ANR Vs M/S Durga Projects Inc [March 06, 2018]

Judgement Date : march/2018 , Citation : 2018 Latest Caselaw 156 SC

Commissioner of Customs Central Excise and Service Tax, Guntur Vs. M/S. The Andhra Sugars Ltd. [FEBRUARY 05, 2018]

Judgement Date : february/2018 , Citation : 2018 Latest Caselaw 67 SC

Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax Vs. Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. [FEBRUARY 01, 2018]

Judgement Date : february/2018 , Citation : 2018 Latest Caselaw 58 SC

Securities and Exchange Board of India Vs. M/s. Opee Stock-Link Ltd. & ANR [JULY 11, 2016]

Judgement Date : july/2016 , Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 478 SC

State of West Bengal and Others Vs. Calcutta Club Limited [May 04, 2016]

Judgement Date : may/2016 , Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 343 SC

Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala Vs. M/s K.T.C. Automobiles [January 29, 2016]

Judgement Date : january/2016 , Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 98 SC

M/S Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd & ANR. Vs. State of Uttarakhand & Ors. [December 9, 2015]

Judgement Date : december/2015 , Citation : 2015 Latest Caselaw 804 SC

Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs, Kerala Vs. M/s Larsen & Toubro Ltd. [August 20, 2015]

Judgement Date : august/2015 , Citation : 2015 Latest Caselaw 540 SC

State of Karnataka Etc. Vs. M/S Pro Lab & Ors. Etc. [JANUARY 30, 2015]

Judgement Date : january/2015 , Citation : 2015 Latest Caselaw 70 SC

M/S. Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. [May 06, 2014]

Judgement Date : may/2014 , Citation : 2014 Latest Caselaw 334 SC

Agricultural Produce Market Committee Vs. Biotor Industries Ltd. & ANR. [November 29, 2013]

Judgement Date : november/2013 , Citation : 2013 Latest Caselaw 840 SC

State of U.P & Ors. Vs. Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. [OCTOBER 18, 2013]

Judgement Date : october/2013 , Citation : 2013 Latest Caselaw 736 SC

M/S. Larsen & Toubro Limited & ANR. Vs. State of Karnataka & ANR. [September 26, 2013]

Judgement Date : september/2013 , Citation : 2013 Latest Caselaw 688 SC

M/s Purbanchal Cables & Conductors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assam State Electricity Board & Another [July 10, 2012]

Judgement Date : july/2012 , Citation : 2012 Latest Caselaw 354 SC

Phulchand Exports Ltd. Vs. OOO Patriot

Judgement Date : october/2011 , Citation : 2011 Latest Caselaw 761 SC

Dharmarth Trust J&K Jammu & Ors. Vs. Dinesh Chander Nanda [2010] INSC 714 (8 September 2010)

Judgement Date : september/2010 , Citation : 2010 Latest Caselaw 647 SC

Union of India & Ors. Vs. M/S Martin Lottery Agencies Ltd. [2009] INSC 906 (5 May 2009)

Judgement Date : may/2009 , Citation : 2009 Latest Caselaw 452 SC

Accounts Officer, Jharkhand State Electricity Board and Anr Vs. Anwar Ali [2007] Insc 1025 (9 October 2007)

Judgement Date : october/2007 , Citation : 2007 Latest Caselaw 812 SC

Numaligarh Refinery Ltd Vs. Daelim Industrial Company Ltd [2007] Insc 899 (6 September 2007)

Judgement Date : september/2007 , Citation : 2007 Latest Caselaw 686 SC

State of Rajasthan & Anr Vs. Rajasthan Chemist Association [2006] Insc 445 (24 July 2006)

Judgement Date : july/2006 , Citation : 2006 Latest Caselaw 445 SC

Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P [2006] Insc 311 (12 May 2006)

Judgement Date : may/2006 , Citation : 2006 Latest Caselaw 311 SC

M/S. Sunrise Associates Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi & Ors [2006] Insc 255 (28 April 2006)

Judgement Date : april/2006 , Citation : 2006 Latest Caselaw 255 SC

Smt. Claude-Lila Parulekar Vs. M/S. Sakal Papers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors [2005] INSC 195 (18 March 2005)

Judgement Date : march/2005 , Citation : 2005 Latest Caselaw 195 SC

Smt. Claude-Lila Parulekar Vs. M/S. Sakal Papers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors [2005] INSC 192 (18 March 2005)

Judgement Date : march/2005 , Citation : 2005 Latest Caselaw 192 SC

Tata Consultancy Services Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [2004] Insc 686 (5 November 2004)

Judgement Date : november/2004 , Citation : 2004 Latest Caselaw 645 SC

Secretary, Thirumurugan Co-Operative Vs. M. Lalitha & Ors [2003] INSC 627 (11 December 2003)

Judgement Date : december/2003 , Citation : 2003 Latest Caselaw 619 SC

M.S. Madhusoodhanan & ANR Vs. Kerala Kaumudi Pvt. Ltd. & Ors [2003] INSC 346 (1 August 2003)

Judgement Date : august/2003 , Citation : 2003 Latest Caselaw 342 SC

Government of Maharashtra & Ors Vs. M/S Deokar's Distillery [2003] Insc 158 (10 March 2003)

Judgement Date : march/2003 , Citation : 2003 Latest Caselaw 157 SC

R.D. Goyal & ANR Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd [2002] INSC477 (20 November 2002)

Judgement Date : november/2002 , Citation : 2002 Latest Caselaw 478 SC

M/S Haridas Exports Vs. All India Float Glass Mfrs. Assn. & Ors [2002] INSC 298 (22 July 2002)

Judgement Date : july/2002 , Citation : 2002 Latest Caselaw 298 SC

M/S Haridas Exports Vs. All India Float Glass Mfrs. Assn. & Ors [2002] INSC 296 (22 July 2002)

Judgement Date : july/2002 , Citation : 2002 Latest Caselaw 296 SC

Vasantha Viswanathan & Ors Vs. V.K. Elayalwar & Ors [2001] INSC 419 (24 August 2001)

Judgement Date : august/2001 , Citation : 2001 Latest Caselaw 419 SC

Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Vs. Shiv Kumar Joshi [1999] INSC 424 (14 December 1999)

Judgement Date : december/1999 , Citation : 1999 Latest Caselaw 424 SC

Ferro Alloys Corporation Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors [1998] INSC 607 (14 December 1998)

Judgement Date : december/1998 , Citation : 1998 Latest Caselaw 607 SC

Ferro Alloys Corporation Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors [1998] INSC 605 (14 December 1998)

Judgement Date : december/1998 , Citation : 1998 Latest Caselaw 605 SC

Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund Vs. Kartick Das [1994] INSC 341 (20 May 1994)

Judgement Date : may/1994 , Citation : 1994 Latest Caselaw 336 SC

Lucknow Development Authority Vs. M.K. Gupta [1993] INSC 483 (5 November 1993)

Judgement Date : november/1993 , Citation : 1993 Latest Caselaw 476 SC

Marwar Tent Factory Vs. Union of India & Ors [1989] INSC 337 (9 November 1989)

Judgement Date : november/1989 , Citation : 1989 Latest Caselaw 337 SC

Builders Association of India & Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors [1989] INSC 114 (31 March 1989)

Judgement Date : march/1989 , Citation : 1989 Latest Caselaw 114 SC

Coffee Board, Karnataka, Bangalore Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [1988] INSC 164 (11 May 1988)

Judgement Date : may/1988 , Citation : 1988 Latest Caselaw 163 SC

Food Corporation of India Vs. Surendra, Devendra & Mohendra Transport Co [1987] INSC 370 (10 December 1987)

Judgement Date : december/1987 , Citation : 1987 Latest Caselaw 369 SC

Executive Engineer Irrigation Galimala & Ors A Vs. Abaaduta Jena [1987] INSC 264 (22 September 1987)

Judgement Date : september/1987 , Citation : 1987 Latest Caselaw 263 SC

H. Anraj Vs. Government of Tamilnadu [1985] INSC 221 (4 October 1985)

Judgement Date : october/1985 , Citation : 1985 Latest Caselaw 221 SC

State of Orissa & Other Vs. The Tltaghur Paper Mills Company Ltd. & ANR [1985] INSC 43 (1 March 1985)

Judgement Date : march/1985 , Citation : 1985 Latest Caselaw 43 SC

Khazan Chand Vs. State of Jammu And Kashmir & Ors [1984] INSC28 (13 February 1984)

Judgement Date : february/1984 , Citation : 1984 Latest Caselaw 28 SC

State of Karnataka Vs. Krishna Bhima Walvakar & ANR [1981] INSC 110 (7 May 1981)

Judgement Date : may/1981 , Citation : 1981 Latest Caselaw 110 SC

Consolidated Coffee & ANR Vs. Coffee Board, Bangalore [1980] INSC 82 (15 April 1980)

Judgement Date : april/1980 , Citation : 1980 Latest Caselaw 82 SC

Vishnu Agencies (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer & Ors [1977] INSC 240 (16 December 1977)

Judgement Date : december/1977 , Citation : 1977 Latest Caselaw 240 SC

Juggilal Kamlapat Vs. Pratapmal Rameshwar [1977] INSC 220 (24 November 1977)

Judgement Date : november/1977 , Citation : 1977 Latest Caselaw 220 SC

Union of India Vs. Central India Machinery Manufacturing Co. Ltd. & Ors [1977] INSC 105 (6 April 1977)

Judgement Date : april/1977 , Citation : 1977 Latest Caselaw 105 SC

State of Maharashtra Vs. The Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. [1976] INSC 270 (29 October 1976)

Judgement Date : october/1976 , Citation : 1976 Latest Caselaw 270 SC

Collector of Customs & Ors Vs. Pednkar and Company (Private) Limited & ANR [1976] INSC 92 (31 March 1976)

Judgement Date : march/1976 , Citation : 1976 Latest Caselaw 92 SC

Balabhagas Hulaschand Vs. State of Orissa [1975] INSC 304 (9 December 1975)

Judgement Date : december/1975 , Citation : 1975 Latest Caselaw 302 SC

Davenport & Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, West Bengal [1975] INSC 150 (31 July 1975)

Judgement Date : july/1975 , Citation : 1975 Latest Caselaw 148 SC

M/S. Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P) Ltd. Vs. C.I.T., West Bengal [1972] INSC 252 (10 October 1972)

Judgement Date : october/1972 , Citation : 1972 Latest Caselaw 252 SC

Mahabir Commercial Co. Ltd Vs. C.I.T. West Bengal, Calcutta [1972] INSC 210 (8 September 1972)

Judgement Date : september/1972 , Citation : 1972 Latest Caselaw 210 SC

State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. M/S. Saith & Skelton (P) Ltd. [1972] INSC 32 (28 January 1972)

Judgement Date : january/1972 , Citation : 1972 Latest Caselaw 32 SC

Chhitter Mal Narain Das Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1970] INSC 145 (21 July 1970)

Judgement Date : july/1970 , Citation : 1970 Latest Caselaw 145 SC

State of Maharashtra & ANR Vs. Champalal Kishanlal Mohta [1970] INSC 67 (17 March 1970)

Judgement Date : march/1970 , Citation : 1970 Latest Caselaw 67 SC

Joint Commercial Tax Officer, Harbour Div. Ii Madras Vs. Young Men's Indian Association Madras & Ors [1970] INSC 20 (12 February 1970)

Judgement Date : february/1970 , Citation : 1970 Latest Caselaw 20 SC

Ram Narain Mahto Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh [1969] INSC 244 (16 September 1969)

Judgement Date : september/1969 , Citation : 1969 Latest Caselaw 244 SC

Kurapati Venkatasatyanarayana & Ors Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh [1969] INSC 165 (1 August 1969)

Judgement Date : august/1969 , Citation : 1969 Latest Caselaw 165 SC

Tika Ram & Sons Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Sales Tax U.P., Lucknow [1968] INSC 75 (22 March 1968)

Judgement Date : march/1968 , Citation : 1968 Latest Caselaw 75 SC

Tirumala Venkateswara Timber Andbamboo Firm Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Rajahmundry [1967] INSC 280 (28 November 1967)

Judgement Date : november/1967 , Citation : 1967 Latest Caselaw 280 SC

Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Saidapet & ANR Vs. Enfield India Ltd., Co-Operative Canteen Ltd. [1967] INSC 270 (23 November 1967)

Judgement Date : november/1967 , Citation : 1967 Latest Caselaw 270 SC

P.S.N.S. Ambalavana Chettiar And Co. Ltd & ANR Vs. Express Newspapers Ltd., Bombay [1967] INSC 257 (10 November 1967)

Judgement Date : november/1967 , Citation : 1967 Latest Caselaw 257 SC

Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad Vs. M/S. Motor And General Stores (P.) Ltd. [1967] INSC 134 (2 May 1967)

Judgement Date : may/1967 , Citation : 1967 Latest Caselaw 134 SC

Devi Das Gopal Krishnan & Ors Vs. State of Punjab & Ors [1967] INSC 102 (10 April 1967)

Judgement Date : april/1967 , Citation : 1967 Latest Caselaw 102 SC

Mohanlal Hargovinddas Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors [1966] INSC 250 (15 November 1966)

Judgement Date : november/1966 , Citation : 1966 Latest Caselaw 253 SC

Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors [1965] INSC 212 (12 October 1965)

Judgement Date : october/1965 , Citation : 1965 Latest Caselaw 212 SC

Badri Prasad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & ANR [1965] INSC 70 (16 March 1965)

Judgement Date : march/1965 , Citation : 1965 Latest Caselaw 70 SC

The Morvi Mercantile Bank Ltd. & ANR Vs. Union of India [1965] INSC 55 (3 March 1965)

Judgement Date : march/1965 , Citation : 1965 Latest Caselaw 55 SC

Government of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Guntur Tobaccos Ltd. [1964] INSC 264 (18 November 1964)

Judgement Date : november/1964 , Citation : 1964 Latest Caselaw 264 SC

M/S. Ouchterloney Valley Estates Ltd. Vs. State Kerala [1964] INSC 232 (23 October 1964)

Judgement Date : october/1964 , Citation : 1964 Latest Caselaw 232 SC

Shree Bajrang Jute Mills Ltd. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [1964] INSC 29 (6 February 1964)

Judgement Date : february/1964 , Citation : 1964 Latest Caselaw 29 SC

Thansingh Nathmal & Ors Vs. A. Mazid, Superintendent of Taxes [1964] INSC 22 (3 February 1964)

Judgement Date : february/1964 , Citation : 1964 Latest Caselaw 22 SC

Patel Gordhandas Hargovindas Vs. Municipal Commissioner, Ahmedabad [1963] INSC 76 (28 March 1963)

Judgement Date : march/1963 , Citation : 1963 Latest Caselaw 76 SC

Bhopal Sugar Industries Ltd. Madhya Pradesh & ANR Vs. D.B. Dube, Sales Tax Officer, Bhopal Region [1962]380 (21 December 1962)

Judgement Date : december/1962 , Citation : 1962 Latest Caselaw 380 SC

M/S New India Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Bihar [1962] INSC 334 (26 November 1962)

Judgement Date : november/1962 , Citation : 1962 Latest Caselaw 334 SC

M/S. William Jacks & Co. Ltd. Vs. The State of Bihar [1962] INSC 328 (21 November 1962)

Judgement Date : november/1962 , Citation : 1962 Latest Caselaw 328 SC

M/S. George Oakes (P.) Ltd. Vs. State of Madras [1961] INSC 199 (28 April 1961)

Judgement Date : april/1961 , Citation : 1961 Latest Caselaw 199 SC

Carl Still G. M. B. H. & ANR Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors [1961] INSC 168 (19 April 1961)

Judgement Date : april/1961 , Citation : 1961 Latest Caselaw 168 SC

Jute And Gunny Brokers Ltd.& ANR Vs. The Union of India & Ors [1961] INSC 55 (17 February 1961)

Judgement Date : february/1961 , Citation : 1961 Latest Caselaw 55 SC

The Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madhya Pradesh & Bhopa Vs. Bhopal Textiles Ltd., Bhopal [1960] INSC 170 (17 October 1960)

Judgement Date : october/1960 , Citation : 1960 Latest Caselaw 170 SC

Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi Vs. Messrs. P. M. Rathod & Co [1959] INSC 94 (20 may 1959)

Judgement Date : may/1959 , Citation : 1959 Latest Caselaw 94 SC

The Commissioner of Sales-Tax,Eastern Division, Nagpur Vs. Husenali Adamji And Co [1959] INSC 44 (21 April 1959)

Judgement Date : april/1959 , Citation : 1959 Latest Caselaw 44 SC

Firm of M/S. Peare Lal Hari Singh Vs. The State of Punjab & ANR [1958] INSC 39 (7 April 1958)

Judgement Date : april/1958 , Citation : 1958 Latest Caselaw 39 SC

Pandit Banarsi Das Bhanot Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors [1958] INSC 36 (3 April 1958)

Judgement Date : april/1958 , Citation : 1958 Latest Caselaw 36 SC

The State of Madras Vs. Gannon Dunkerley & Co.,(Madras) Ltd. [1958] INSC 35 (1 April 1958)

Judgement Date : april/1958 , Citation : 1958 Latest Caselaw 35 SC

The Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. The State of Bihar [1958] INSC 13 (19 February 1958)

Judgement Date : february/1958 , Citation : 1958 Latest Caselaw 13 SC

The Bengal Immunity Company Limited Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors [1954] INSC 120 (4 December 1954)

Judgement Date : december/1954 , Citation : 1954 Latest Caselaw 120 SC

Duni Chand Rataria Vs. Bhuwalka Brothers Ltd. [1954] INSC 117 (3 December 1954)

Judgement Date : december/1954 , Citation : 1954 Latest Caselaw 117 SC

Himmatlal Harilal Mehtav Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors [1954] INSC 26 (16 March 1954)

Judgement Date : march/1954 , Citation : 1954 Latest Caselaw 26 SC

Poppatlal Shah Vs. The State of Madras [1953] INSC 27 (30 March 1953)

Judgement Date : march/1953 , Citation : 1953 Latest Caselaw 27 SC

State Bare Acts

• Law of torts – Complete Reading Material
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – September 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 2 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 3 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 5 October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 2 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 3 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 – December 2019
• Sign in / Join

• Sale of Goods Act

The Sale of Goods Act, 1930

This article is written by Kishita Gupta , a Unitedworld School of Law, Karnavati University, Gandhinagar, graduate. The article deals with a thorough discussion of Sale of Goods Act, 1930. The article will also discuss various case laws on the subject.

It has been published by Rachit Garg.

Table of Contents

Introduction 

We are aware that every business entity runs by buying or selling commodities. In India, such sales of goods are governed by the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 . This Act has been codified as a separate enactment of the law relating to the sale of goods, which was contained in Sections 76 to 123 of the Indian Contract Act of 1872 . Those sections of the Contracts Act have been repealed by the Sale of Goods Act. This was done because the provisions of the Contract Act were found to be inadequate to deal with the new situations that were arising due to an increase in mercantile transactions in the wake of rapid industrialisation. Hence, a new law was formed to deal with the sale of goods which incorporates various provisions of the English Sale of Goods Act, 1893 . However, despite the separate legislation in terms of the Sale of Goods Act, the Contract Act continues to apply to the contracts relating to the sale of goods. The Act lacks in defining some of the expressions and words that are otherwise defined in the Contract Act. In this article, the author will be discussing the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 in detail by analysing all the important provisions and case laws. 

Definition clause of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930

Let us begin with a thorough understanding of the definition clause of the Act for a better understanding. Section 2 of the Sales of Goods Act of 1930 deals with the definitions relating to the subject. Some of the clauses of Section 2 are mentioned below:

In clause 1 of Section 2, the term ‘buyer’ is defined to include both a person who actually purchases the goods and a person who is almost willing to do so. However, it was observed in Helby v. Mathews (1895) that a person is not regarded as a buyer if an agreement essentially grants him the option to purchase the products without subjecting him to any legal obligation to do so.

Delivery 

Clause 2 defines the term ‘delivery’ to involve a transaction of a transfer of possession which is done voluntarily. Delivery can be actual or constructive. It becomes ‘actual’ when the buyer receives the actual products or receives the key to the warehouse where the goods are kept. Whereas, when a delivery is made without affecting the custody or actual ownership of the item, such as when attornment (acknowledging) a delivery or making a symbolic delivery, it is said to be a constructive delivery. 

Goods 

Clause 7 deals with the “goods,” which refers to any movable property that is neither money nor actionable claims. 

The following list of items is considered goods as per the interpretations given by the Indian judiciary:

• The shares of a company were considered goods by the court in Bacha F. Guzdar v. CIT (1955) .
• While Rash Behari v. Emperor (1936) held that gas and electricity are not goods, Associated Power Co. v. Ram Ratan (1970) held electricity to be ‘goods’.
• The ‘Standing timber’ on land which was agreed to be severed from the land before the sale, was held to be goods in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Champalal (1971) .
• The interest of the partners in the partnership assets which consists of any immovable property was considered to be a movable property and thus good in the case of Narayanaapa v. Bhaskar Krishnappa (1966) .
• Sugarcane which was supplied to a sugar factory was considered to be good in the U.P. Coop. Cane Unions Federations v. West U.P. Sugar Mills Assn. (2004) .

The following list of items was considered to be ‘not goods’ under this Section:

• The goods supplied by a building contractor in the execution of building construction are not goods as per the case of Mahadeo v. State of Bombay (1959) .
• Where a person entrusts documents to his lawyer, those documents will not be considered goods under this Section as per the case of R.D. Saxena v. Balram Prasad Sharma (2000) .
• The sale and purchase of lottery tickets are actionable claims which are excluded from the definition of goods. Therefore, it will not be goods as was held in the case of Union of India v. Martin Lottery Agencies Ltd. (2009) .

Specific goods

Clause 14 of Section 2 deals with ‘Specific Goods.’ Specific goods are utilised as an alternative to generic or unascertained goods. The items are specific if they are identified at the moment of sale. However, they are unascertained goods if the items are not identified at the moment of the sale. For example, the sale of a car in a person’s possession would be considered to be the sale of a specific good. Whereas a sale of a car from a showroom that contains different variants of a car is a contract for the sale of unascertained goods. 

Formation of a contract 

What is a contract of sale.

Section 4 of the Act discusses sales and the agreement to sell. The term “contract of sale” is generic in nature. It tends to include both agreements to sell and sale. It was formerly called “bargain and sale.”

Subsection 3 of Section 4 defines the sale and the agreement to sell. The contract of sale is known as a sale when the property in the products is transferred from the seller to the buyer under it, thereby transferring ownership from the seller to the buyer. A sale can also be called an executed contract of sale. However, a contract is referred to as an agreement to sell when the transfer of property in the goods is supposed to happen at a future date or is dependent on the fulfilment of a subsequent condition. An agreement to sell may also be called an executory contract of sale.

It was held in the State of Uttaranchal v. Khurana Brothers (2011) that when the time elapses or the condition gets fulfilled, at that time an agreement to sell becomes a sale. 

Subsection 1 also permits a person who owns the goods partially to sell the goods or transfer the ownership to that extent.

In Camera House, Bombay v. State of Maharashtra (1969) , the Bombay High Court ruled that providing a print, processing film, and taking a picture in a studio are all separate transactions. Therefore, it is obvious that the first two contracts call for the use of a photographer’s artistic talent and labour. However, the final contract for providing copies of it to clients is a contract of sale.

Absolute and conditional contracts of sale

A contract of sale may be either absolute or conditional. When the property is actually sold to the buyer and transferred completely, it is considered absolute. If the parties annex conditions to the contract, it is conditional. These situations could be either subsequent or preceding. When a sale is to be completed subject to the fulfilment of a specific condition, the condition is known as a “condition precedent.” It is common for an auction sale of goods to include a clause stating that if the purchase price is not made within a certain period of time, the item may be resold. In this scenario, there is a real sale when the property is transferred to the buyer, but if the transaction is not completed, the seller retains ownership of the goods.

Difference between sale and agreement to sell

• A sale results in the transfer of the buyer’s general ownership of the items, or it generates a jus in rem . An agreement to sell does not transfer property; rather, it creates a jus in personam that allows either party to take legal action against the other’s person and general estate if the other fails to uphold his end of the bargain. ( Sales Tax Officer v. Buddha Prakash Jai Prakash (1954) )
• After a sale, if the purchaser does not pay for the items, the seller may file a lawsuit under Section 55   (suit for price) to recover the purchase price. When there is just an agreement to sell anything and the buyer refuses to take delivery of the goods and pay for them, the seller may only bring a claim for damages under Section 56 (damages for non-acceptance).
• If there is a sale agreement in place and the seller breaches it, the buyer alone has a claim for damages as their own remedy. The seller is still the rightful owner of the items, and he is free to dispose of them however he sees fit. But if a sale has already been made and the seller breaches it, the buyer is likewise entitled to the same legal recourse against the seller as an owner of the goods would have in relation to the items themselves, such as a suit for conversion or detinue.
• If there is a sale agreement and the products are destroyed, the seller is responsible for the loss; nevertheless, if there has been a sale, the buyer is responsible for the loss even though the things may not have actually been in his possession.

What are the formalities of the contract

Section 5 provides for the bare formalities for making “contracts of sale.” 

The following prerequisites must be met for a contract to be formed:

• The making of a purchase or sale offer and the acceptance of that offer.
• Delivery arrangements for goods or services may be immediate, simultaneous, in instalments, or in the future.
• Making provisions for the price paid. The fee may be paid in whole immediately, in instalments over time, or all at once.

The basic requirements for a contract of sale are as follows:

• It may be in writing.
• It may be by word of mouth.
• It may be partly oral or written.
• It may be implied from the conduct of parties or by the course of their business.
• The law allows for official written instruments to be sealed in the case of the government and some statutory corporations “Subject to the provisions of any law for the being in force” applies to this group.

A Constitution Bench determined in Poppatlal Shah v. The State of Madras (1953) that the phrase “sale of goods” is a composite statement made up of several components or ingredients. The exchange of money or the promise to exchange money, the delivery of goods, and the actual transfer of title are the components of a contract of sale. However, until the buyer becomes the legal owner of the goods, the sale has not been completed.

Subject matter of a contract

Existing or future goods.

As per Section 6 , the following types of existing or future goods form a part of the subject matter of the contract.

• The goods may be existing or whose possession will happen in the future.
• The goods whose acquisition is dependent on a contingency.
• Where there is a present sale of future goods.

Goods perishing before making a contract

Only specific goods are covered under Section 7 . It states that the contract is void if the goods have expired at the time of the contract without the seller’s knowledge. This Section is based on the principle that a contract is void if both parties are in error regarding a fact that is material to it.

The Section further states that the contract is void if the products have been sufficiently damaged that they no longer match the contract’s description without the seller’s knowledge. The seller’s knowledge is crucial in this situation.

Goods perishing before sale but after an agreement to sell

Section 8 deals with the case where the goods perish, etc., after the agreement to sell is made and before the risk passes to the buyer. It applies only to specific goods.

What are the conditions and warranties

Sections 14 to 17 of the Sale of Goods Act of 1930 deal with implied conditions and warranties.

Implied conditions

Implied conditions as to title.

According to Section 14(a) , in every contract of sale, unless the circumstances of the contract are such as to show a different intention, there is an implied condition on the part of the seller that, in the case of a sale, he has a right to sell the goods.

The fundamental yet crucial implied terms on the part of the seller are as follows in any contract of sale:

• First off, he is legally authorised to sell the goods.
• Second, if there is a sale agreement, he will have the right to sell the products when the contract is fulfilled.

As a result, the buyer has the right to reject the products if the seller does not have the title to sell them. He has the right to receive his entire purchase price back.

The case of Rowland v. Divall (1923) observed that if the seller has no title and the buyer has to give up the goods to the real owner, he is entitled to a return of the price.

Implied condition in sales by description

Section 15 of the Act states that there is an implied condition that the products meet the description in a sale of goods by description. There is a condition that the goods shall meet the description.  It is a fundamental requirement of the contract, and if it is breached, the buyer is entitled to reject the goods regardless of whether they can be inspected.

Implied condition as to the quality of fitness

Section 16 lays down exceptions to the rule of caveat emptor. These are as follows:

• Implied condition as to the quality or fitness [Section 16(a)]

The following are the essentials of this condition as mentioned in sub-section (1):

• The buyer makes known to the seller the particular purpose for which the goods are required.
• The buyer relies on the seller’s skill or judgement.
• The goods are of a description dealt in by the seller, whether he be the manufacturer or not.
• Implied condition as to merchantables.

The second exception, as stated in sub-section (2), is when the goods are purchased by description from a seller, whether or not he is the manufacturer, who deals in goods of that description. There is an implied condition that the goods must be of merchantable quality in such circumstances.

Implied condition on sale by sample

When there is an express or implied clause in the contract to that effect, Section 17 considers the sale to be by sample. The seller expressly assures that the goods sold on a sample sale should match the description of a small parcel approved at the time of the transaction.

Implied warranties

Implied warranty of quiet possession.

As per Section 14(b), every contract of sale contains an implied warranty that the buyer will have and that they shall enjoy quiet possession of the goods unless the conditions of the contract indicate a different condition. The seller is responsible for compensating the buyer for any damages if this warranty is breached.

Implied warranty that goods are free from encumbrances

Section 14(c) states that there is an implied warranty from the seller that the goods are unencumbered by any charge or encumbrance. The seller is responsible for compensating the buyer for damages if it is later discovered that the goods are subject to a charge in the favour of a third party.

Expressed conditions and warranties

A provision in a legal agreement that stipulates that something must be done or exist is how the term is defined in the dictionary. The term “expressed conditions” refers to clauses that both parties agree to include in the contract and that are necessary for it to work. Those warranties that are included in the contract and are typically accepted by both parties are referred to as “expressed warranties.”

Effects of the contract 

Transfer of property between seller and buyer , transfer of property in the sale of specific or ascertained goods.

In cases where the goods are specific and ascertained as stated in Section 18 , Sections 19 to 22 govern their transfer. The following is explained as follows:

Property passes when intended to pass  

According to Section 19 of the Act, the property only becomes transferable when both parties to a contract intend it to. Whether that stage has been reached in each case depends on the creation of a contact. Regard must be given to the contract’s terms, the parties’ behaviour, and the case’s circumstances in order to determine the parties’ intentions.

Specific goods in a deliverable state  

According to Section 20 , in the event of an unconditional contract of sale for specific commodities in a deliverable state, the property in the goods passes to the buyer at the period designated by the parties. When an unconditional contract of sale for “particular things” in a “deliverable state” is made, the property in the goods passes to the buyer at the time the contract is made, according to Section 20, which also contains the first rule for determining the parties’ intention.

Specific goods to be put into a deliverable state

Section 21 states that it is irrelevant if the price payment or the time of delivery of the goods, or both, is delayed where there is an unconditional contract for the sale of specific goods in a deliverable form. The property in the goods goes to the buyer at the time the contract is made.

Specific goods are in a deliverable state but the seller has to do something to ascertain the price

Section 22 states that when there is a contract for the sale of specific goods in a deliverable condition but the seller is required to weigh, measure, test, or carry out another action with regard to the goods in order to determine the price, the property does not transfer until the seller carries out the required action and notifies the buyer of it.

The Supreme Court outlined the structure of the provisions relating to the transfer of title of goods in the case of Contship Container Lines Ltd. v. D.K. Lall (2010) . According to Section 19, in a contract of sale of specific or ascertained goods, the property in them is transferred to the buyer at the time specified in the contract by the parties, and for the purpose of determining the parties’ intention, consideration must be given to the contract’s terms, the parties’ behaviour, and the circumstances of the case. The rules for determining the parties’ intentions for the moment at which the property is to pass to the buyer are set forth in Sections 20 to 24 of the aforementioned Act.

Transfer of property in the sale of ascertained goods and appropriation

According to Section 23 of the Act, when goods of that description are unconditionally appropriate 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 passes to the buyer. This applies when the contract is for the sale of unascertained goods or future goods by description. Additionally, if the seller does not reserve the right to dispose of the goods when delivering them to the buyer, a career, or another bailee for transmission to the buyer, he is believed to have unconditionally appropriated the items to the contract.

The Supreme Court in the case of Arihant Udhyog v. the State of Rajasthan (2017) observed that it is evident from a joint reading of Sections 23 and 24 that title to goods only transfers from the seller to the buyer upon a sale of those things. The purpose of the parties with respect to the conditions of the contract must be determined in order to determine when such a sale fructifies and the property passes. The property in goods passes when they are in a deliverable state and there is an unconditional contract for the sale of certain things, unless it is clear from the terms of the contract that there is no such purpose.

Transfer of title

“ Nemo dat quod non habet,” a Latin maxim, states that no one can give what they do not have. The underlying idea behind the transfer of title is this. These rules regarding the transfer of title are outlined in Sections 27 – 30 of the Sale of Goods Act of 1930. Let us have a look at it in detail.

Sale by the person, not the owner

As a general rule, no man can sell goods or give a good title to them unless he is the owner, or someone has his authority or consent, i.e., an agent. The rule is the same, although the sale is accompanied by a transfer of a bill of lading, delivery order, warrant, or similar documents. 

The sale by a person who is not the owner is covered under Section 27 . Consider a sales contract where the seller –

• Is not the rightful owner of the goods.
• Does not have the owner’s permission to sell the products.
• Has not received permission from the owner to act as his agent in selling the items
• In these situations, assuming the owner’s actions disallow the seller’s authorization to sell, the buyer does not obtain a superior title to the goods than the seller did.

Exceptions to Section 27 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930

The following are the exceptions to the rule that no seller of goods gives to the buyer thereof a better title than his own, namely, –

Sale by a mercantile agent (Section 27)

Consider a mercantile agent who, with the owner’s permission, is in possession of the goods or a document proving ownership of the items. When functioning as a mercantile agent in the regular course of business, such an agent is permitted to sell the products. If the buyer acts in good faith and has no cause to suspect that the seller has the legal authority to sell the items, the sale shall be deemed valid. In this situation, the transfer of title is legitimate.

Sale by one of the joint owners (Section 28)

Goods are usually bought under joint ownership. The goods are frequently held in the possession of one of these joint owners with their consent. If this person, who is the only owner of the goods, sells them, the buyer becomes the new owner of the goods’ property. As long as the buyer acts in good faith and has no grounds to suspect that the seller has the authority to sell the goods, this is permissible.

Section 28 lays down three conditions for validating a sale by one of the co-owner. These are as follows:

• He must be in sole possession by permission of his co-owners.
• The purchaser acts in good faith, i.e., with honesty.
• The purchaser had no notice at the time of the contract of sale that the seller had no authority to sell.

Sale by a person in possession under a voidable contract (Section 29)

Take into account a person who obtains possession of specific goods through a contract that can be cancelled owing to pressure, deception, fraud, or undue influence. The buyer obtains a good title to the goods if this individual sells them before the original owner of the goods terminates the contract. This is covered under Section 29 of the Act.

Sale by a person who has already sold the goods but continues to have possession [Section 30 (1)]

As per Section 30(1) , the following conditions enable the seller to pass a good title:

• The goods or the documents proving ownership of the goods must remain in the seller’s possession. After the buyer receives the goods, possession of them as a hirer or bailee is not acceptable.
• Either the buyer received the goods or received the title documents, whichever came first. A simple sale, commitment, or other disposition arrangement won’t cut it.
• Good faith and the second buyer’s lack of knowledge of the first sale.

Sale by buyer obtaining possession before the property in the goods has vested in him [Section 30 (2)]

Consider a buyer who, with the seller’s consent, takes possession of the goods before the property in them is transferred to him. He is free to dispose of the goods by selling, pledging, or giving them away.

The second buyer acquires a fair title to the goods if he accepts delivery of them in good faith without being made aware of the lien or any other claim of the first seller.

A hire-purchase agreement, which gives the beneficiary personal possession of the goods and the option to buy them unless a sale is agreed upon, is an exception to this norm.

Performance of the contract

Rights of the seller under the sale of goods act, 1930.

• To reserve the right to dispose of the goods until certain conditions are met in accordance with Section 25(1).
• To consider a sale on approval to be completed when the buyer conveys his acceptance, performs an act adopting the sale, or retains the goods after the stated date (or a reasonable amount of time) without providing notice of rejection. (Section 24)
• To only deliver the goods upon request from the buyer. ( Section 35 )
• To provide the goods in instalments when agreed upon. [ Section 39(1) ]
• To assert a lien and maintain ownership of the items until the purchase price is paid [ Section 47(1) ]
• Until the price is paid, the goods may be stopped in transit and returned to the owner [Sections 49(2) and 50 ].
• To resell the goods in certain conditions. ( Section 54 )
• Keeping the goods from being delivered until the buyer acquires ownership. [ Section 46(2) ]
• When ownership of the goods has been transferred to the buyer or when the price is due on a specific date under the terms of the contract and the buyer does not make the payment, the seller may bring a price claim against the buyer. [ Section 55 ]

Duties of the seller under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930

• To make the necessary arrangements for the buyer to receive ownership of the goods.
• Determining and aligning the goods to the sale contract.
• To transfer the buyer’s legal and complete ownership of the goods.
• To fulfil the contract’s requirements for the delivery of the goods. ( Section 31 )
• To guarantee that the provided goods adhere to any implied or stated conditions or warranties.
• To prepare the goods for delivery and deliver them as and when the buyer requests. (Section 35)
• The seller must fulfil the obligation to deliver the items on time, or at least by the agreed-upon hour and reasonable time. [ Sections 36(2) and (4) ]
• To pay for all costs associated with and related to making a delivery, up until the point at which the goods are placed in a deliverable state. [Section 36(5)]
• To provide the goods in the predetermined quantity. [ Section 37(1) ]
• The seller must ensure that only when the buyer requests it, deliver the goods in phases. [ Section 38(1) ]
• The seller must make insurance arrangements for the goods while they are in the carrier’s care or transfer. [Section 39(2)]
• To promptly notify the customer when the goods are being shipped by sea so that he can arrange for insurance [Section 39(3)]

Rights of the buyer under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930

• To receive the items in accordance with the contract. (Sections 31 & 32 )
• Rejecting the goods when they don’t match the contract’s specifications for description, quality, or quantity. (Section 37)
• When goods are given in instalments without a written agreement to that effect, the contract may be terminated. [Section 38(1)]
• The seller must inform the buyer when the goods are being shipped by sea so that the buyer can make insurance arrangements. [Section 39(3)]
• To be given a fair chance to inspect the goods and determine whether they are in compliance with the contract. ( Section 41 )
• To file a lawsuit against the seller if they don’t deliver the goods in order to get their money back.
• If the seller wrongfully fails or declines to deliver the goods to the customer, the buyer has the right to sue the seller for damages. ( Section 57 )
• To bring a specific performance claim against the seller.
• To file a claim against the seller for damages for failing to uphold a warranty or a situation that is deemed to be a violation of a warranty ( Section 59 )
• To file a claim against the seller for damages for a potential violation of the contract ( Section 60 )
• When a seller breaches a contract and must refund the customer’s money, the buyer may sue the seller for interest ( Section 61 )

Duties of the buyer under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930

• Accepting the delivery of the goods when the seller is willing to fulfil their end of the bargain. (Section 31)
• To make the required payment in order to obtain the goods.
• To submit a delivery request for the goods. (Section 35)
• Should insist on getting the goods delivered at a fair time. [Section 36(4)]
• Accepting instalment deliveries of the items and paying for them in accordance with the arrangement. [Section 38(2)]
• The buyer should accept the risk of deterioration during transit when the goods are to be delivered somewhere other than the location where they were purchased ( Section 40 )
• To notify the seller if the purchaser declines or rejects the products. ( Section 43 )
• After the seller offers delivery, the buyer must accept delivery of the goods in a timely manner ( Section 44 )
• To fulfil the contract’s requirements by paying the amount at the point at which the buyer acquires ownership of the goods. (Section 55)
• To cover losses for failing to accept the goods. ( Section 56 )

Goods were confirmed to have been received in complete and satisfactory functioning condition in State Bank of Mysore v. Machado Computer Services (2009) . As a result, it was determined that the plaintiff had exercised his entitlement under Section 41 of the Sale of Goods Act and was considered to have accepted the goods upon making the notification of acceptance to the supplier as specified in the delivery challan. According to Section 42 of the Act, both the quality and quantity of the supplied goods were accepted. Further, the description of the goods as to the make or brand is also deemed to have been accepted upon such acceptance following examination of the goods specifically accepted, and no defect could be stated to be in respect of such brand in accordance with the second proviso to Section 16 of the Act. Therefore, the supplier’s obligation under the sales contract was fulfilled. The goods were accepted by the plaintiff. The plaintiff was therefore obligated to pay for the goods after accepting them in accordance with the injunction granted by Sections 31 and 32 of the Act.

Rights of an unpaid seller under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930

According to Section 45 of the Act of 1930, a seller of goods is considered “unpaid” if he has not received the whole of the price, as well as if the buyer has provided him with a bill for the amount due but the bill is not honoured. The phrase “the whole of the price” refers to the total sum agreed upon with respect to the entire contract, and in the event that the contract is severable, the price of the severable component is divided. In each instance, it is an issue of fact as to whether it was given as an unconditional or conditional payment. Partially unpaid sellers are on par with fully unpaid sellers.

The unpaid seller, by the implications of Section 46 , has the following rights:

Right to lien 

The lien of an unpaid seller is a right to retain possession of the goods until tender or payment of the price. The unpaid seller is entitled to a lien only in three situations, as mentioned in Section 47 of the Act. These are as follows:

• There is no stipulation as to credit. The seller is liable to deliver the goods to the buyer when demanded by the buyer but he has no right to have possession of the goods till he pays the price. 
• A sale on credit operates as a waiver of the lien during the currency of the credit,
• If the buyer becomes insolvent before the price is paid, and the seller is in possession of the goods, he is entitled to retain possession even if the goods are sold on credit and the term of credit has not expired.

As was already noted, a lien depends on the actual ownership of goods. When the possession is removed from the seller, the lien disappears along with it, as noted in Section 49 . In the following situations, an unpaid seller of goods loses his lien thereon:

• When he transfers ownership of the goods without reserving it to a carrier or other bailee with the intention of delivering it to the buyer.
• When the buyer lawfully obtains the possession of the goods.
• When the seller expressly or impliedly waives his lien rights. 

Rights of stoppage of goods in transit

This right entails stopping the products while they are in a carrier’s control or lodged at any point during transmission to the buyer, regaining ownership of them, and holding onto them until the price is tendered or paid. To exercise the right, the seller must be unpaid, the buyer must be insolvent, the seller must have parted with possession of the goods, and the buyer must not have acquired them.

Additionally, the delinquent seller may use both of his stoppage-in-transit rights:

• By assuming actual possession of the goods.
• By providing a statement to the seller identifying who is in possession of the goods.

Such instructions may be delivered to the person who actually owns the goods. In the latter scenario, the contract must be reached well in advance to allow the superior to contact his agent or servant in time to deliver the goods to the consumer.

He could be held accountable for the conversion if he offers the goods to the buyer while making an error. The seller must put up with the redelivery expenses.

Suit for breach of contract

Suit for price by the seller against the buyer.

Sub-section (1) of Section 55 deals with a contract where the property in the goods has passed irrespective of delivery. This will involve two types of cases:

• Suit for the price of goods sold and delivered. 
• Suit for the price of goods bargained and sold. 

The contingent situations contemplated by sub-section (2) are as follows:

• Non-delivery
• Non-appropriation of the goods to the contract
• Property in the goods that are continuing to vest in the seller.

Suit for damages by the seller against the buyer for non-acceptance of the goods 

Section 56 says that where the buyer wrongfully neglects or refuses to accept and pay for the goods, the seller may sue him for damages for non-acceptance of the goods. 

The Indian Contract Act of 1872’s provisions Section 73 and Section 74 serve as the foundation for calculating the damages. In accordance with Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act, when a contract is broken, the party who suffers as a result of the breach is entitled to receive compensation for any loss suffered by him as a result, which naturally results from the breach in the ordinary course of events or which the parties knew would likely occur when they entered into the contract.

The methods that were available for resolving the discomfort brought on by the contract’s non-performance must also be taken into consideration when calculating the loss or damage brought on by a breach of contract.

The day on which the contract should have been fulfilled by delivery and acceptance as specified by the agreement, or, in the absence of a time frame, at the moment of non-performance, is the date at which the market price is to be determined.

Suit for damages by the buyer against the seller for non-delivery of the goods 

The buyer may file a lawsuit against the seller for non-delivery damages if the seller willfully neglects or declines to deliver the goods to the buyer under Section 57 . The buyer has all the rights of an owner against individuals who act on the property in a way that violates his rights once it has passed, provided that he is entitled to instant possession. Therefore, if the seller wrongfully resells them, the buyer may bring a lawsuit against both the seller and the second buyer. However, the rights against the latter may be limited by the provisions of sections 30 and 54.

The seller cannot be accused of ignoring or refusing to deliver the goods if the buyer has not made payment for earlier deliveries within 15 days of the date of delivery and the seller withholds delivery. The seller would have the right to demonstrate that it would be impossible for him to fulfil his end of the bargain.

Suit for specific performance by the buyer against the seller

Under Section 58 of the Act, in any suit for breach of contract to deliver specific or ascertained goods, the court may, if it thinks fit, on the application of the plaintiff, by its decree directs that the contract shall be performed specifically, without giving the defendant the option of keeping the goods in exchange for payment of damages. This is subject to the provisions of Chapter II of the Specific Relief Act, of 1877 . The plaintiff may file an application at any time prior to the decree, and the court may grant the decree unconditionally or with such terms and conditions as damages, payment of the purchase price, or other matters as it may deem just. This Section is the only one in this Act that deals with the equitable right to a specific performance. 

Suit by the buyer against the seller for breach of warranty

Section 59 of the Act deals with four remedies for the breach of warranty. These are as follows:

• If the loss caused by the warranty violation is less than the purchase price, the buyer may request a reduction in the price. The rule of a price reduction or extinction is not a set-off and only applies to claims that are cross-subject to the same contract.
• If the loss matches the price, the buyer may refuse to pay it at all.
• The buyer may refuse to pay the price as well as claim the excess if the loss exceeds the cost.
• In each of these scenarios, he has the option of paying the amount or suing the seller for warranty breach damages. The buyer has three options for pursuing his claim: through litigation, set-off, or counterclaim.

A breach of warranty does not give the buyer the right to return the goods, and his only options are those listed in Section 59, which are to hold the seller liable for the breach of the warranty by reducing or eliminating the price or suing the seller for damages as a result. According to the definition of ‘warranty’ provided in Section 12(3), only the buyer has the right to file a claim for damages when the warranty is breached.

This Section outlines the procedures a buyer who, in either scenario, has a claim for damages may use to pursue it. It does not address situations in which a fraudulent misrepresentation may allow the buyer to void the contract or situations in which, according to the contract’s specific terms, the buyer may return the goods in the event of a warranty breach.

Suit for damages by seller or buyer for anticipatory breach of contract 

Section 60 outlines the procedure a buyer who, in either scenario, has a claim for damages may use to pursue it. It does not address situations in which a fraudulent misrepresentation may allow the buyer to void the contract or situations in which, according to the contract’s specific terms, the buyer may return the goods in the event of a warranty breach.

Very frequently, situations may emerge where the promisor declares that he will not carry out his share of the performance when the time for performance approaches, even when the performance is to take place in the future. Not doing an act while it is not yet contractually required is not a breach. For this reason, this Section allows the promisee the choice of treating the contract as cancelled in advance or waiting until the day of performance to treat it as subsisting.

Interest by way of damages and special damages

The right to seek interest, extra damages, or money paid in the absence of consideration is preserved under Section 61 . The Interest Act of 1839 allowed interest to be awarded in the following circumstances at the going rate:

• From the due date specified in the contract, on all debits or certain sums payable at a specific time under a written instrument.
• In other situations, interest is charged beginning on the date the written demand is made.

In the case of M/s M.K.M. Moosa Bhai Amin, Kota v. Rajasthan Textile Mills, Bhawanimandi (1974) , the plaintiff sued for the cost of the delivered products as well as interest on the unpaid cost. The District Judge rejected the interest claim on the grounds that there was no contract to pay interest if the cost of the supplied items was not paid in full. The plaintiff argued that under Section 61(2) of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, the plaintiff was entitled to a reasonable interest even in the absence of the contract. The supply had been made up until September 18, 1962, and under normal circumstances, the defendant should have paid the cost of the goods within a reasonable amount of time after delivery. However, the payment was over a year late, forcing the plaintiff to file a lawsuit to recover the money. According to a ruling, in these situations, the lower courts ought to have erred on the side of the plaintiff and applied Section 61(2) of the Sale of Goods Act to grant interest on the amount of the purchase price of the goods. The Rajasthan High Court permitted interest at 6% annually, which was regarded as a reasonable rate of interest.

The Supreme Court in the case of Marwar Tent Factory v. Union of India (1989) observed that an award of interest to a seller on an amount of price not paid by the buyer within a reasonable time cannot be denied merely because in the notice served under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure ( CPC), the seller had not claimed interest. The Court held that, on the facts, the seller is entitled to a decree of interest at a rate of 6 percent per annum on the unpaid price from the date of delivery of goods.

The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, 1980

The 11th April 1980 adoption of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), commonly known as the Vienna Convention, established a legal text that states in Article 1 that it applies to contracts for the sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different States (a) when the States are contracting States; or (b) when the principles of private international law require the application of the law of a contracting State. 

India has neither signed nor ratified the Convention on the International Sale of Goods, despite a number of other nations have done so. But when handling cases involving parties from two separate countries, the Indian Courts occasionally refer to the Convention.

The two Indian Acts were created many years ago, and as a result, they do not reflect the situations of the present. The clauses in these two Acts are outdated and irreverent, and they do not address the requirements of contemporary sales and contacts that involve a variety of sophisticated aspects. Therefore, the Convention on International Sale of Commodities should be ratified for the reason that it was just established and would assist India to meet the requirements of contemporary contracts and sales of goods. A more uniform and effective way to conduct international sales of commodities would be made possible by the convention, which would also benefit India. The CISG would be very beneficial in addressing the shortcomings and loopholes in the domestic legal framework. This universal law agreement will address elements like cross-border contracts that are not covered by the domestic Sale of Goods Act. Several clauses in the Convention are very helpful in day-to-day business operations.

The article has covered all the important topics and provisions along with case laws. As stated above, the author would like to conclude by stating that it is high time India updated itself by following global standards. The Sale of Goods Act is pre-independence legislation and is mostly inconsistent with today’s trade regimes. If India upgrades the laws as per the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods 1980, it will be easier and better to deal with private international laws as well as if there is a conflict of laws, then also globally used legislation would be better to be used, considering exports and imports. There have been very few cases of the Sale of Goods Act in recent years. One of the reasons may be that the provisions are kind of outdated to tackle the new era problems.

Frequently Asked Question (FAQs)

What are the essential things covered under the sale of goods act, 1930.

It is crucial to comprehend the major terminology used in the Sale of Goods Act in order to fully comprehend the Act. The two parties (the buyer and the seller), the mercantile agent, the goods, the price, and the transfer of general property are among them. The Act further deals with the formation and the formalities of a contract. It also covers the suits for breach of contract of sales by both buyer and seller.

What happens if an agreement to sell or a contract of sale is broken?

In essence, when one party fails to complete the sale, the other may claim damages for breach of contract. In the event of a default by the seller, he is required to reimburse the buyer for any additional, justifiable costs. The opposite party might also try to force the wrongdoer to carry out the agreement’s terms. Getting the sale agreement is generally advised from the perspective of the buyer.

What kind of risk is associated with the sale of goods in India?

The owner of the goods bears the risk of loss or damage to goods, according to the common rule in use in India. Res perit domino , a Latin maxim, means the object is lost to the owner of the property. This theory is applicable when selling movable property. According to Section 26 of the Sale of Goods Act of 1930, ownership of the goods remains with the owner if it has not been done so already. The products, however, are at the risk of the buyer if the property has been transferred to them. If the parties to the contract have not agreed to any other explicit provision referencing this in their contract, then this clause will apply. No matter what, this rule is relevant.

References 

• LexisNexis’s The Sale of Goods Act by Pollock & Mulla – 10th Edition 2012
• https://blog.ipleaders.in/remedies-breach-sale-goods-act/  

Students of  Lawsikho courses  regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on  Instagram  and subscribe to our  YouTube  channel for more amazing legal content.

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

What is civil law, difference between civil law and criminal law, an in-depth analysis of section 9 of the cpc, leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

3-Day Bootcamp on How to get a law firm job

Register now

Thank you for registering with us, you made the right choice.

Congratulations! You have successfully registered for the webinar. See you there.

1st Edition

Cases and Materials on Sale of Goods

• Taylor & Francis eBooks (Institutional Purchase) Opens in new tab or window

Description

This book, first published in 1982, focuses on a specific area of commercial law: the Sale of Goods Act. The book contains key cases and statutes relating to the sale of goods, each prefaced by a contextualising introduction. Notes and questions are also included, as are the full texts of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and the relevant parts of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Table of Contents

About vitalsource ebooks.

VitalSource is a leading provider of eBooks.

• Access your materials anywhere, at anytime.
• Customer preferences like text size, font type, page color and more.
• Take annotations in line as you read.

Multiple eBook Copies

This eBook is already in your shopping cart. If you would like to replace it with a different purchasing option please remove the current eBook option from your cart.

Book Preview

The country you have selected will result in the following:

• Product pricing will be adjusted to match the corresponding currency.
• The title Perception will be removed from your cart because it is not available in this region.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Sale Of Goods Law – A Case Study – Sample Legal Paper

Related Papers

Festus O Ukwueze

Francisco de Elizalde

One of the main inroads to the so-called Classic Contract Law has been made by implied terms imposing a certain quality on the subject matter of contracts, an outcome that has been achieved by resorting to a variety of legal sources and tools. Modernization and harmonization of European Contract Law, to this respect, has mainly focused on sales contracts (as an archetype to others), including the requirement of conformity in its terms. The article deals with the concept of conformity and assesses its profound implications to traditional notions of Contract Law. As in many European legal systems the principle of conformity is restricted to certain types of sales, it is necessary to furtherly deepen in national Law to assess the existence of equivalent requirements to conformity whenever it does not apply. To this end, the work undertakes a Comparative Law perspective following a realistic and functional methodology. As a central instrument in the modernization of Contract Law, the article assesses the desirability of generalizing the principle of conformity to all contracts, a position that, from a legal and economic perspective, is not recommended. The relationship between freedom of contract and reasonable expectations of the parties is an underlying tension to this matter in respect of which the present work proposes a solution. Résumé: L'une des principales percées à le soi-disant Droit classique du contrat a été faite par des clauses implicites imposant une certaine qualité sur l'objet du contrat, un résultat qui a été obtenu par le recours à une variété de sources et d'instruments juridiques. La modernisation et l'harmonisation du droit européen des contrats, à cet égard, a porté principalement sur le contrat de vente (comme un archétype pour les autres), y compris l'exigence de conformité dans son contenu. L'article traite de la notion de conformité et évalue ses implications profondes aux notions traditionnelles du droit des contrats. Comme dans de nombreux systèmes juridiques européens, le prin-cipe de conformité est limité à certains types de ventes, il est nécessaire d'approfondir en droit national pour évaluer l'existence d'exigences équivalentes à la conformité à chaque fois qu'il ne s'applique pas. À cette fin, le travail engage une perspective comparative suivant une méthodologie réaliste et fonctionnelle. En tant qu'instrument central de la modernisation du droit des contrats, l'article évalue l'opportunité de généraliser le principe de conformité à tous les contrats, une position qui, du point de vue juridique et économique, non est recommandé. La relation entre la liberté 71 contractuelle et les attentes raisonnables des parties est une tension sous-jacente à cette question à l'égard duquel le présent ouvrage propose une solution. Zusammenfassung: Einer der Haupteingriffe in das sogenannte klassische Vertragsrecht ist durch implizite Vertragsbestandsteile gelungen wodurch eine gewisse Qualität in den Vertragsinhalt eingebracht wurde. Dies ist durch den Rückgriff auf verschiedene Rechtstraditionen und Rechtsmechanismen erreicht worden. Die Modernisierung und Harmonisierung des europäischen Vertragsrechts hat sich, in diesem Zusammenhang, vor allem auf Kaufverträge konzentriert (als ein Vorreiter für andere Arten von Verträgen), inklusive auf die Voraussetzung der Vertragsmäßigkeit. Dieser Artikel behandelt das Konzept der Vertragsmäßigkeit und untersucht seine tiefgründigen Implikationen auf traditionelle Ansichten des Vertragsrechts. Da in vielen europäischen Rechtssystemen der Grundsatz der Vertragsmäßigkeit auf bestimmte Kaufarten beschränkt ist, wird es notwen-dig sein nationale Rechtssysteme genauer zu untersuchen um die Existenz äquivalenter Voraussetzungen der Vertragsmäßigkeit zu beurteilen, falls dieser Grundsatz nicht anwend-bar ist. Daher untersucht diese Arbeit die Problemstellung von einer komparativen Perspektive des Rechts und folgt eine realistische und funktionelle Methodologie. Als zentrales Instrument in der Modernisierung des Vertragsrechts, erforscht dieser Artikel die Eignung der Generalisierung des Grundsatzes der Vertragsmäßigkeit für alle Vertragsarten, wodurch eine Stellungnahme geboten wird, die von einem rechtlichen und ökonomischen Standpunkt nicht empfohlen wird. Der Zusammenhang zwischen der Vertragsfreiheit und angemessener Erwartungen der Vertragsparteien bewirkt eine Spannung zu dieser Problemstellung, zu welcher dieser Artikel eine Lösung bietet.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Law of Sale of Goods - Notes, Case Laws And Study Material

Legal bites provides comprehensive law of sale of goods study materials for students, lawyers, and corporations to deepen their understanding of the subject..

Legal Bites provides comprehensive Law of Sale of Goods study materials for students, lawyers, and corporations to deepen their understanding of the subject. The series covers important topics and case studies and offers valuable insights for those seeking to improve their knowledge. Legal Bites is committed to providing quality and insightful study materials.

The Sale of Goods Act, 1930 is the primary legislation in India that deals with the sale of goods. It is based on the principles of contract law and regulates the rights and obligations of buyers and sellers in a transaction involving the transfer of ownership of goods.

Law of Sale of Goods - Notes, Case Laws And Study Material (Topics to be updated Soon)

Module i: introduction to the sales of goods act.

• Historical Background and Development of the Act
• Scope and Applicability of the Act
• Distinction between Sale and Agreement to Sell

Module II: Conditions and Warranties

• Concept of Conditions and Warranties
• Types of Conditions and Warranties
• Distinction between Conditions and Warranties
• Effects of Breach of Conditions and Warranties
• Remedies available to the parties in case of breach

Module III: Transfer of Ownership and Delivery

• Rules regarding the Transfer of Ownership in a Sale Transaction
• Transfer of Property in Specific or Future Goods
• Modes of Delivery and their Legal Consequences
• Risk and Title to Goods
• Unascertained Goods and Appropriation

Module IV: Performance of the Contract

• Rights and Duties of the Seller and the Buyer
• Obligations regarding Delivery and Payment
• Acceptance or Rejection of Goods

Module VI: Unpaid Seller and Remedies

• Definition and Rights of an unpaid seller
• Lien and Right of Stoppage in Transit
• Right of resale and Damages for non-acceptance
• Suit for price and Damages for non-payment
• Rights and remedies against the goods

Module VII: Other Provisions

• Auction Sales and their Legal Implications
• Rights and Liabilities of the Seller and the Buyer
• Performance of the Contract by Third Parties
• Disputes Resolution and Legal Remedies Available

Other articles

[1] 7 Important Legal Precedents: Law of Sale of Goods

Law of Sale of Goods Mains Question Answer Series: Important Questions for Judiciary & University Exams

Law of Sale of Goods Mains Question Answer Series Part I

Law of Sale of Goods Mains Question Answer Series Part II

Law of Sale of Goods Mains Question Answer Series Part III

Law of Sale of Goods Mains Question Answer Series Part IV

Law of Sale of Goods Mains Question Answer Series Part V

Law of Sale of Goods Mains Question Answer Series Part VI

Your valuable feedback in the form of comments or any desired inputs is encouraged and always welcome.

Every contribution toward a goal is valuable, regardless of how small it may be.

Admin Legal Bites

Legal Bites Study Materials correspond to what is taught in law schools and what is tested in competitive exams. It pledges to offer a competitive advantage, prepare for tests, and save a lot of money.

Related News

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

Luxury sales are flattening amid a self-inflicted creativity crisis and price hikes, study finds

FILE - A woman walks past the Gucci store window at the Via Montenapoleone fashion district, during the Milan’s fashion week in Milan, Italy, Friday, Sept. 25, 2020. The post-pandemic surge in global sales of luxury handbags, shoes and apparel is on pace to stall this year amid a creativity crisis and price hikes focused on the biggest spending customers. (AP Photo/Luca Bruno, File)

FILE - Creations for ‘Runway Reinvented’, part of the ‘We Are Made in Italy’ collecting fashion event are shown during the women’s Spring Summer 2023 fashion week, in Milan, Italy, Wednesday, Sept. 21, 2022. The post-pandemic surge in global sales of luxury handbags, shoes and apparel is on pace to stall this year amid a creativity crisis and price hikes focused on the biggest spending customers. (AP Photo/Alberto Pezzali, File)

• Copy Link copied

MILAN (AP) — The post-pandemic surge in global sales of luxury handbags, shoes and apparel is set to stall this year amid a creativity crisis and price hikes as brands shift focus to the biggest spending customers, a new study by the Bain consultancy said Tuesday.

Bain is forecasting flat worldwide luxury sales in 2024 following a slight first-quarter dip, according to the study commissioned by the Altagamma association. The consultancy cited political uncertainty during a presidential election year in the United States as well as economic uncertainty in China that has brought on a phenomenon of “luxury shaming.”

Beyond socioeconomic factors and rising geopolitical tensions, the slowdown is also partly “self-inflicted,’’ said Bain partner Claudia D’Arpizio.

She cited a “creativity crisis,’’ in the sector, as a number of major fashion houses are transitioning creative directors, and a new focus on the super-wealthy customers, at the expense of the aspirational middle class and Gen-Z youngsters who fueled growth before the pandemic.

“There is a lack of clarity for many of these brands. They are making attempts to regain focus. It is five, six brands under turn-around, big ones. This is not helping the overall excitement,’’ D’Arpizio told The Associated Press. “This is a supply-driven industry. When you have the brands really in tune with customer needs, it usually reacts quickly.’’

She said some “tweaks” are needed on strategy and price points, adding that “you can’t grow without the middle class and younger generations.”

Among major fashion houses, Gucci and Moschino have made runway debuts of their new creative directions, while the first Valentino collection by the new creative director hits the runway in September. Chanel has the position to fill after the incumbent resigned earlier this month.

While inflation is one element of price hikes, D’Arpizio said brands are also refocusing on the estimated 6 million to 8 million consumers at the top of the pyramid as they search for better profit margins. At the same time, there has been less rejuvenation in the offerings.

Steep price increases for items that don’t show significant innovation, and feel like something they have seen before, leaves customers “upset and puzzled.”

Flat global luxury sales forecasts follow a pent-up post-pandemic spending surge that pushed sales during the 2021-23 period up 24% over 2019 levels.

Last year, sales of personal luxury goods grew by 4% to 362 billion euros (about $388 billion) from 349 euros in 2022, due largely to a resurgence of U.S. and Asian tourism to Europe fueling purchases. Add in luxury travel, fine art, cars and yachts, the vast global luxury market expanded to 1.5 trillion euros last year — highlighting a trend toward experiences over tangible goods.

Japan is a bright spot as the return of foreign tourists with the yen at the lowest level to the U.S. dollar in 20 years, while Europe continues strong trends due to tourist spending and an increase in local consumption, especially in French and Italian cities.

The global spike in luxury handbags, shoes, and clothing sales could be coming to an end due in part to China's 'luxury shaming,' study finds

• Global luxury goods sales growth will slow in 2024, per a new Bain & Company report. 
• The report cited China's economic uncertainties and rising outbound tourism as key factors.
• "Luxury shaming" and price hikes without innovation could also contribute to sluggish sales growth.

The spike in the global sales of luxury goods could be coming to an end in 2024, and "luxury shaming" could be in part to blame.

A report published on June 18 by Bain & Company forecast that worldwide sales of personal luxury goods — which include high-end clothing, shoes, handbags, and beauty products — would grow at the slowest rate since 2020, when sales plummeted due to pandemic-related factors.

Related stories

If Bain's forecast pans out, it could be due in part to a slowdown in China. The report cited two factors in particular that are holding back sales in the Chinese market: "the revival of outbound tourism" and "weakening local demand caused by rising economic uncertainties."

As pandemic conditions have eased, more wealthy Chinese citizens have begun traveling internationally — allocating money to travel that they might otherwise have spent on luxury goods.

Additionally, economic uncertainty in China has brought about a phenomenon called "luxury shame" or "luxury shaming." With some Chinese citizens experiencing financial challenges , some higher-income people have been hesitant to flaunt their wealth with luxury goods. Bain said this phenomenon played out in the US during the Great Recession — and has impacted sales in China.

Bain partner Claudia D'Arpizio told The Associated Press that in addition to macroeconomic factors, luxury goods companies may also be to blame for the slowdown in sales.

She said some luxury goods companies have raised prices but not justified these hikes with sufficient innovation, leaving some consumers "upset and puzzled."

Watch: Why the retail industry has its eye on Gen Z

• Main content

• News & Analysis on Food & Beverage Development & Technology

Plant-based sales ARE growing, just not the usual suspects

25-Jun-2024 - Last updated on 25-Jun-2024 at 08:27 GMT

• Email to a friend

What? Plant-based meat sales are lagging?!

No, this isn’t news to anyone in the industry. The plant-based ‘ slowdown ​’ has been on food manufacturers’ radar for at least a couple of years now, with the cost-of-living crisis and market saturation just two of the factors stunting category growth.

But just because sales of plant-based meat alternatives are sluggish, doesn’t mean plant-based across the board is struggling to grow. It’s not.

The unusual suspects of the plant-based boom ​

When industry and media refer to a plateauing in plant-based, they’re largely referring to plant-based meat analogues.

That’s for two reasons: firstly, the plant-based meat category has ​been plateauing, and secondly, measuring sales of packaged products sold from one section in-store is easier to do.

What’s more challenging is measuring sales of plant-based ingredients from multiple categories. These less-hyped ingredients range from tempeh and tofu (high-protein soy-based products that can substitute, but don’t mimic, meat) through to legumes and beans.

“Actual sales of plant-based ingredients are very much increasing,” explained Jeroen Willemsen, innovation lead, Protein Shift, at Dutch agrifood ecosystem Foodvalley.

But they’re just not the numbers on industry’s radar. “It’s very difficult to get the actual [sales] numbers when products are used as an ingredient, rather than sold as a single SKU,” he said at food- and ag-tech conference F&A Next in the Netherlands. “I know for a fact that’s where the growth is.”

Why is the sale of plant-based ingredients on an upwards trajectory, whereas the plant-based meat market is flatter than it’s been in recent years? Willemsen puts it down to consumer routines. Tempeh, legumes, and beans are convenient for the consumer; they’re not necessarily delegated to one section of the supermarket.

“Even though we would like [consumers] to go to a separate aisle, to go and pick up that packet of plant-based meat or seafood, we also have to be realistic… Obviously we haven’t [managed] to reach out to them over the past 10-15 years.

“But we can ​reach out to the consumer we want to reach with more convenience, and that’s what’s happening right now.”

What do the retailers say? And can they be doing more? ​

Willemsen is not alone in this view. The UK’s largest supermarket retailer Tesco has also observed a rise in demand for tofu and tempeh, which earlier this year observed, was up volume-wise by 20%.

Tesco also noted an increase in scratch cooking with vegetables and other meat-free ingredients, as well as plant-based whole cuts such as steak.

“Customers are starting to understand the versatility of plant-based ingredients and whole cuts, and are creating a wide variety of meals such as tofu stir-fries, meat-free curries using chicken alternatives or beans and pulses, and classic steak and chips using plant-based steaks,” said Tesco’s plant-based food buyer Cate May back in April.

Some in the sector believe retailers can be doing more to increase plant-based sales.

Miriam Ueberall, chief R&D officer at Upfield Research & Development, for one, is critical of supermarkets’ segmentation of plant-based products – which can see alternatives placed in less-than-optimal locations.

“Retailers can facilitate the entry point for consumers a lot, by having the right shelf placement, by not having a segment at the back of the store which claims to be ‘free-from’ or ‘alt meat’.”

Instead, the R&D lead would prefer plant-based alternatives be located alongside their conventional dairy or meat counterparts. In so doing, she believes making animal-free swaps would be easier for consumers.

Manufacturers have a role to play in encouraging plant-based uptake ​

But it’s not only the responsibility of retailers. Manufacturers have a major role to play in encouraging plant-based uptake, suggested Ueberall.

Recipe development aside, it’s also about developing the right format and size of products that best hit the mark with consumers.

Others agree. Manufacturers, retailers and even foodservice operators can help encourage plant-based consumption by making it as easy as possible for consumers. That may not mean selling a plant-based seafood or meat product separately, but instead mixing it in with a salad or a sandwich for convenient consumption.

If it’s a plant-based seafood product, for example, brands might be better off getting creative with its presentation and format, suggested Kianti Figler, founder and CEO of Dutch cultivated salmon cell fat start-up Upstream Foods, at F&A Next.

“I think there are better ways to go about it, and that’s what we need to be focusing on.”

Related news

Related products

Study: Natural Preservation Is What Consumers Want

Content provided by Corbion | 11-Jun-2024 | White Paper

If you’ve been trying to decide between the consumer appeal of a natural solution and the efficacy of a conventional preservative, there's good news....

Culinary Inspiration for future protein products

Content provided by Griffith Foods | 04-Jun-2024 | Product Brochure

Download the Protein Solutions brochure and embark on a journey of culinary inspiration!

Case Study: Make Your Meat Go Further

Content provided by ADM | 07-May-2024 | Case Study

The rising cost of meat has become a significant concern for consumers worldwide, leading many to reconsider their dietary choices.

Formulate for appealing labeling with Symrise chicken meat powder

Content provided by Symrise | 17-Apr-2024 | Product Brochure

In today's competitive market, catching consumers' eyes is paramount.

Related suppliers

• Rethink Events Ltd
• Turn up the heat on your culinary creations Givaudan | Download Application Note
• The B2B Marketing Benchmark – Food & Nutrition Barrett Dixon Bell (BDB) | Download Insight Guide
• Study: Natural Preservation Is What Consumers Want Corbion | Download White Paper
• Culinary Inspiration for future protein products Griffith Foods | Download Product Brochure
• Sustainable sourcing strategies for business continuity Symrise | Download White Paper
• Your partner in plant-based meat alternatives ADM | Download White Paper

Upcoming editorial webinars

• 24 Sep 2024 Tue Webinar Decarbonising Supply Chains at the Source
• 25 Sep 2024 Wed Webinar Eco-friendly Production from Farm to Fork
• 26 Sep 2024 Thu Webinar New Tech and Novel Ingredients for a Sustainable Future

On-demand webinars

• Unlocking Consumer Emotions: A Comprehensive Framework for Emotional Associations in Food and Beverage Product Development
• Real-time Brix monitoring - the secret ingredient your process needs for quality and efficiency
• Sweet Solutions: Exploring the Future of Sugar Reduction

Promotional features

FoodNavigator

• Advertise with us
• Press Releases – Guidelines
• Apply to reuse our content
• Contact the Editor
• Report a technical problem
• Whitelist our newsletters
• Why Register
• Editorial Calendar
• Event Calendar
• Expert Advisory Panel