ijalr

Trending: Call for Papers Volume 5 | Issue 1: International Journal of Advanced Legal Research [ISSN: 2582-7340]

RIGHTS OF UNPAID SELLER UNDER SALE OF GOODS ACT, 1930 – Krishna Singh

INTRODUCTION:

 In  every  contract  of  sale,  there  is  a  reciprocal  promise  to  be  performed  by  the  seller  and  buyer.  Any  seller  becomes  an  unpaid  seller  when  the  whole  price  of  the  good  has  not  been  paid  to  them.  Whereas  the  term  unpaid  seller  has  been  defined  clearly  under  the  Section  45  of  sale of goods act,1930 [1] .

A  seller  can  be  a  “Unpaid  seller”,  when  the  whole  of  the  price  has  not  been  paid  or  tendered;  when  a  bill  of  exchange  or  other  negotiable  instrument  has  been  received  as  conditional  payment,  and  the  condition  on  which  it  was  received  has  not  been  fulfilled  by  reason  of  the  dishonour  of  the  instrument  or  otherwise  as  defined  under  section  45  of  the  sale  of  goods  act. [2]

Section 45(2)[3] of the Sale of good act,1930 mentions that a seller would also encompass an individual who is acting as the agent to the seller, or also the person on whom the bill of lading has been issued, or an endorsed or agent who has himself paid, is or directly responsible for the price. A seller, when the price of goods hasn’t been paid in part, would be an unpaid seller to that extent.

Also, A seller would not be classified as an unpaid seller when he has received a negotiable instrument, like a bill of exchange, promissory note or cheque but if the good has been delivered and that particular instrument gets dishonoured, then the seller would be an unpaid seller and accordingly he can make use of his rights. Furthermore, it is also assumed that the negotiable instrument  always functions on conditional basis and when it gets dishonoured, the condition does not fulfil.[4] However the buyers who have rejected the goods don’t come under the ambit of Unpaid seller and they also do not enjoy the same rights as an unpaid seller.[5]

All  the  different  rights  pertaining  to  the  unpaid  sellers  have  been  enumerated  under  the  Chapter  V  of  Sales  of  goods  act  named  as  “Rights  of  Unpaid  Sellers  against  the  goods”.  There  are three rights available  to  an  unpaid  seller  if  in  the  case  any  default  has  been  made  by  the  buyer  are,  Right  to  Lien, Right to Stoppage in Transit and Right of Resale.

These rights of an Unpaid seller do not depend upon any agreement express or implied, between the parties. They arise by the implication of law. These rights typically assume that ownership of the goods has transferred to the buyer. However, to ensure that the seller has been given the same rights and protections even when ownership has not passed, Section 46(2)[6] off the sale of good act,1930 explicitly states that in cases where ownership of the goods has not transferred to the buyer, the seller still retains the same rights of lien and stoppage in transit as if the ownership had been transferred.[7]

There are a few characteristics that must be taken in to notice while classifying a seller as unpaid seller. They are Seller must be unpaid either partly or wholly and payment of the goods hasn’t not been received during the specified time period, and the seller shouldn’t have refused the payment  when the buyer has endorsed a negotiable instrument it got violated.

This  paper  attempts  to  delve  into  the  intricacies  of  the  rights  provided  to  an  unpaid  seller  under  sale  of  goods  act,1930.  It  also  looks  forward  to  critically  highlighting  various  judicial  pronouncements  where  a  significant  dictum  has  been  stated.  It  is  also  going  to  examine  the  veracity and significance of the rights provided to an unpaid seller.

[1]Ishika Mittal, Rights of an Unpaid Seller under the Sale of Goods Act, 3.3 JCLJ 756 (2023)

[2] §45, Indian Contracts Act,1872

[3]§45(1), Indian Contracts Act,1872

[4]Laxmi Lal v Paras Ram, AIR 2008 Raj 302: 2007 AIHC (NOC) 109 (Raj),

[5] J.L. Lyons & Co Ltd v May & Baker Ltd (1923) 1 KB 685: (1923) 129 LT 413

[6] §46(2), Sale of Goods act,1930

[7]Bloxam v Sanders, (1825) 4 B&C 941, 948: 28 RR 525.