Abstract

The Article deals with a significant question of contractual liability of the government in case of bailment contracts. A bailment must be formed for a specified purpose and with a contract that the goods shall be returned to the bailor after the said purpose has been accomplished, thus the parties should enter into a contract, only then a bailment can be enforceable, accordingly, non-contractual bailments were not considered as enforceable in the court of law in India. The court in various judgements were of the view that the contractual liability which has been entered by the government involuntarily should not impose liability or contractual obligation on it, however through various judgements the court has marked a shift in this approach, but counter views have been in this regard, which we will further deal this article. It deals with the nature and applicability of non-contractual bailments in contract law. The researcher considered the two different approaches followed by Indian courts in this matter. It comparatively analyses both the approaches, and opines why the shift was necessary and how it would be an better alternative to the other in an Indian context, as well as how it could be more beneficial in the contemporary era. It encompasses the most crucial aspects of contract law. The primary purpose of this paper is to examine the government's contractual obligation in the case of a bailment contract.

Keywords