CMA Foundation · Fundamentals of Business Laws and Business Communication · Sale of Goods Act, 1930
Sunita contracts to sell a specific machine lying in her godown to Rohit. Unknown to Sunita, a fire had destroyed the machine before the contract was made. What is the position?
The contract is void. Under Section 7, where a contract is for specific goods that, without the seller's knowledge, had already perished or become so damaged that they no longer match their description when the contract was made, the contract is void.
- AThe contract is voidable at Rohit's option
- BThe contract is voidCorrect
- CThe contract is valid and Sunita must pay damages
- DThe contract is valid and the price must be paid
Explanation
Section 7 says that where specific goods have, without the seller's knowledge, perished at the time of contract, the contract is void. Voidable is wrong because the Act declares it void, not voidable.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Sale of Goods Act, 1930 shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Sale of Goods Act, 1930 questions
- A buyer sets up a seller's breach of warranty to reduce the price payable. Later he discovers that he suffered further loss from the same br…
- Under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, goods that the seller does not yet own and will acquire or manufacture only after the contract of sale is…
- Under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, unless otherwise agreed, who bears the risk in the goods before the property in them is transferred to th…
- Ravi buys a machine from Kapoor Engineering. The contract says that the seller gives no implied condition as to fitness, and Ravi signs it. …
- Which of the following statements about the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 is correct as per its text?
- Nair Metals, an unpaid seller, has not assented to any sub-sale. The buyer, Dutta Ltd., sells the goods to Kapoor Ltd. while the goods are s…