vivekmishra826187@gmail.com asked 5 years ago
if X sold goods to Y but the goods were orignally owned by Z and Z took it from Y. mam here which section will be applicable section 14a(implied condition as to title) or section 14b (warranty as to undisturbed possession)
Warranty of quiet possession [Section 14(b)]
In every contract of sale, the first implied warranty the first implied warranty on the part of the seller is that “the buyer shall have and enjoy quiet possession of the goods.” If the quiet possession of the buyer is in any way disturbed by a person having a superior right than that of the seller, the buyer can claim damages from the seller. Since disturbance of quiet possession is likely to arise only where the seller’s title to goods is defective, this warranty may be regarded as an extension of the implied condition of title provided for by Section 14( a ).
In fact the two clauses of Section 14 [ i.e ., ( a ) and ( b )] are overlapping and it is not easy to see what additional rights this warranty confers on the buyer over and above those conferred by the implied condition as to title contained in Section 14( a ).
ILLUSTRATION: The plaintiff, a lady, purchased a second hand typewriter from the defendant. She thereafter spent some money on its repair and used it for some months. Unknown to the parties the typewriter was a stolen one and the plaintiff was compelled to return the same to its true owner. She was held entitled to recover from the seller for the breach of this warranty damages reflecting not merely the price paid but also the cost of repair ( Mason vs Burningham).
[Notice that the decision in the instant case would not change if we treat it as a case of breach of condition as to title under Sec. 14( a )].
To conclude, there is actually no distinction in the remedy available under Section 14(a) and (b). Warranty as to quiet possession is just an extension of condition of title