The plaintiff handed over to the defendant certain jewels for the purpose of being melted and utilized for making new jewels. Every day as soon as the defendant’s work for the day was over, the plaintiff used to receive half-made jewels from the defendant ... One night the jewels were stolen ...Discuss the remedy...

Question: The plaintiff handed over to the defendant certain jewels for the purpose of being melted and utilized for making new jewels. Every day as soon as the defendant’s work for the day was over, the plaintiff used to receive half-made jewels from the defendant and put them into a box in the defendant’s room without handing over the key to the defendant. One night the jewels were stolen from the defendant’s room. Discuss the remedy available to the plaintiff if any. [HJS 1998]

Find the answer to the mains question of the Law of Contract only on Legal Bites. [The plaintiff handed over to the defendant certain jewels for the purpose of being melted and utilized for making new jewels. Every day as soon as the defendant’s work for the day was over, the plaintiff used to receive half-made jewels from the defendant and put them into a box in the defendant’s room without handing over the key to the defendant. One night the jewels were stolen from the defendant’s room. Discuss the remedy available to the plaintiff if any?]

Answer

The given scenario is similar to the case of Kaliaperumal v. Visalakshmi, AIR 1938 Mad 32. A lady handed over to a goldsmith certain gold to be converted into jewellery. Every evening she used to see that half-made jewellery from the goldsmith put into a box in the goldsmith's room and keep the key in her possession. One morning when she went into the room to take out the gold for further work, she was shocked to see it missing. Her action against the goldsmith to recover the value of the gold also failed.

Delivery is a vital component in order to constitute bailment. In the situational problem, bailment would have come to an end the moment the plaintiff was put in possession of the melted gold. The mere leaving of the box in the defendant’s house, when the plaintiff herself took away the key, can neither be considered delivery nor bailment within the meaning of Section 148 of the Indian Contract. It cannot certainly amount to delivery within the meaning of the provision in Section 149. Even if the defendant could be regarded as a bailee, the circumstances are such as to protect him under Sections 151 and 152 of, the Indian Contract Act.

Therefore, the defendant cannot be held liable as a bailee.  Without legal possession, there cannot be any bailment and there was no duty of the defendant to take care of the jewels. 

In the words of the Madras High Court in the case of Kaliaperumal v. Visalakshmi, 

"If on those facts the plaintiff wanted to fasten a liability upon the defendant for the loss of the goods, she must make out an affirmative ground of liability, and cannot ask the Court to treat the defendant as a bailee and throw upon him the onus of accounting for the loss of the jewels."