a query about ontract act 1972

This query is : Resolved

s.lohani (Querist)
Follow

30 May 2008 Case:
A man phones a jeweller in Bandra and says
," Could you tell me the most expensive ring in your shop". The jeweller says" Yes , there is platinum ring with ruby and diamond. It costs Rs 7 lakh.May i know, who is speaking?"

The man replies," It's abhishek bacchan(suppose). I will be sending Ramu Kaka with a cheque in your shop's favor within an hour.OK" The jeweller is very happy and beleives the caller.

Within 20 minutes, a man arrives and gives him the cheque and goes away with the ring.It is 12pm. At 3 pm, when the jeweller sends the cheque to the bank, he finds that he has been duped.
At 1pm,the man(cheat) goes to another dealer(Mr X) and pledges the ring for Rs 10,000. He takes the money and goes away.

Question:
a) Can the jeweller get back his ring from the dealer Mr X?If yes, in what way...

b) If he can't recover the ring from Mr X; does he have a right to sue the cheat who told himself to be abhisek and recover Rs 7 lac from him. Can he send him to jail?

CA. Yayati Tyagi

CA. Yayati Tyagi (Expert)
Follow

30 May 2008 story itself is stolen from any novel or film. btw, it is 1872 not 1972.

a) i think as per indian law, no person can retain a thing which has come to his possession from a person who has stolen it. jeweller can book a case against caller and inform police abt ring being in possession of dealer. after that police can recover it from dealer and deposit in court from where jeweller can get it back.

b) why do you have a doubt in this? offcourse, he can sue to caller which has commited a fraud on him. he can recover his ring as well as can send him in jail. even dealer can also sue caller to receover his 10,000 rs. i think jeweller has no right to sue dealer.

s.lohani

s.lohani (Querist)
Follow

02 June 2008 Our mam says that as it is a fraud ; it is voidable contratc ie valid till the aggrieved party (jeweller) doesn turn it void. Till 3pm, the jeweller hasn realised the fraud and hence the contract till then is valid. The cheat pledges the ring when the contract is still valid hence the ownership(partial) is transferred to Mr X. So the jeweler can't have his ring back.

This was my mam 's reasoning. Please clarify.

s.lohani

s.lohani (Querist)
Follow

16 June 2008 why doesn anyone answer my question?