Question

Point out an example not related to a contract of bailment

• A. Delivering a watch or radio for repair
• B. Leaving a car or scooter at a parking stand
• C. Leaving luggage in a cloak room
• D. A shareholder executes an agreement/bond favoring the company thereby agreeing to satisfy the company for any loss caused as a consequence of his own act.

Hint:

The defining feature of bailment is the transfer of *possession* of *movable goods*. If there is no delivery of goods, there can be no bailment. Always check for this essential element first.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question requires identifying which of the given scenarios does not fit the definition of a "bailment" under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Step 2: Key Formula or Approach:
Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act defines bailment as the "delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed of according to the directions of the person delivering them." The key elements are (1) delivery of possession of (2) movable goods (3) for a specific purpose, with an agreement to return them.
Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
- (A) Delivering a watch for repair: This is a classic example of bailment. Goods (watch) are delivered for a purpose (repair) and are to be returned.
- (B) Leaving a car at a parking stand: This is a bailment for safe custody. Possession of the car is transferred to the parking operator for the purpose of safekeeping.
- (C) Leaving luggage in a cloak room: This is also a bailment for safe custody.
- (D) A shareholder executing a bond to satisfy the company for loss: This is a promise to compensate for a potential future loss. There is no delivery of goods. This is a contract of indemnity (as defined in Section 124 of the Contract Act), not a contract of bailment.
Step 4: Final Answer:
The example not related to a contract of bailment is (D).

Answer 2

The question asks which scenario does not amount to a bailment under Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Let's test each scenario against the definition of bailment, delivery of movable goods for a purpose, with an obligation to return or dispose of them as directed.

1. Delivering a watch or radio for repair: Possession of a specific movable good is handed over for a defined purpose (repair), with the understanding that it will be returned once repaired. This satisfies every element of bailment.
2. Leaving a car or scooter at a parking stand: Possession of the vehicle is handed to the parking attendant for the purpose of safekeeping, to be returned when the owner leaves. This is also a bailment, specifically for safe custody.
3. Leaving luggage in a cloak room: Similarly, possession of the luggage is transferred for safekeeping and is to be returned on demand, again satisfying the bailment definition.
4. A shareholder executing a bond agreeing to satisfy the company for any loss caused by his own act: Here there is no delivery of any movable goods at all, only a promise to make good a possible future loss. This is a promise to save another from loss, which is the definition of a contract of indemnity under Section 124, not bailment.

Since three of the four examples involve an actual delivery of goods for a purpose with an obligation to return them, while the fourth involves no delivery of goods whatsoever, only the fourth falls outside the definition of bailment.

Therefore, the correct answer is a shareholder executing an agreement/bond favoring the company thereby agreeing to satisfy the company for any loss caused as a consequence of his own act.