CMA Foundation · Fundamentals of Business Laws and Business Communication · Sale of Goods Act, 1930
Under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, where delivery has been delayed through the fault of the buyer, the goods are at the risk of the buyer as regards:
The party at fault bears the risk for any loss that might not have occurred but for that fault. Under the proviso to Section 26, a buyer who delays delivery is responsible for loss linked to the delay, not for every possible loss.
- AAny loss which might not have occurred but for such faultCorrect
- BEvery loss, whether or not connected with the delay
- COnly loss caused by the seller's own negligence
- DNo loss, because risk stays with whoever holds the goods
Explanation
The first proviso to Section 26 makes the party in fault bear the risk for any loss which might not have occurred but for the fault. It is limited to loss connected with the delay, so a blanket liability for every loss is wrong.
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
- Sharma Traders agrees to sell to Mehta Stores 'the Godrej almirah bearing serial number 4471 lying in my showroom'. Without fault of either …
- Dev sold goods to Nisha but retained the goods' documents of title because the price was unpaid. He later pledged the documents to a bank, S…
- Under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, a contract of sale where the transfer of property in the goods is to take place at a future time or after…
- Gupta Foods, a buyer, sets up a breach of warranty by the seller in diminution of the price payable for a lot of packing machines. Afterward…
- Ravi sells his scooter to Mohan but keeps it in his garage with Mohan's agreement. Ravi then sells the same scooter to Suresh, who pays and …
- Under Section 29, Deepak obtained goods from Seema under a contract voidable for fraud. Seema had not rescinded the contract when Deepak sol…