If the bailee mixes the goods of the bailor with his own goods, without the consent of the bailor
A. The bailee is liable to bear the expenses of separation of goods & damages arising therefrom, if the goods can be separated or divided
B. The bailee is liable to compensate the bailor for the loss of goods, if the goods are irresponsible
C. Both A and B
D. Neither A nor B
Answer: Option C
Solution (By Examveda Team)
According to the Indian Contract Act, if a bailee mixes the goods of the bailor with his own goods without the bailor's consent, the consequences depend on whether the goods can be separated or not.If the goods can be separated or divided, the bailee is responsible for the expense of separation and for any damages arising from the mixture.
If the goods cannot be separated, the bailee must compensate the bailor for the loss of the goods.
Therefore, both Option A and Option B are correct, making Option C the correct answer.
Correct Answer: Option C: Both A and B
This Question Belongs to Law >> Indian Contract Act
Join The Discussion
Comments (1)
Indian Contract Act:- Gods displayed in showcase of a shop with price tag is -
A. Invitation to offer
B. Counteroffer
C. Communication
D. None of these
A. Is available to Y's representatives alone
B. Is available to Z alone
C. Is available to Y's representatives & Z both
D. Is available to Y's representatives & after the death of Z, his representatives
Moses v. Macferlan (1555-1774) is a case relating to
A. Theory of unjust enrichment
B. The right of lien
C. Test of agency
D. Doctrine of frustration
A. The active concealment of a fact by one having knowledge or belief of the fact
B. A promise made without any intention of performing it
C. The suggestion, as a fact, of that which is true, by one who does believe it to be true
D. None above
C answer is coreect not a