48. A gave her costly silk saree for dry cleaning to B. B gave a receipt with printed conditions on its back. One condition is that B will not be liable for any damage in dry cleaning. The silk saree is damaged by B’s negligence. Can A recover damage.

1. Facts of the Case

• A entrusted her costly silk saree to B for dry cleaning.
• B issued a receipt containing printed conditions on its back.
• One condition stated that B will not be liable for any damage occurring during the dry cleaning process.
• Due to B’s negligence, the silk saree was damaged.
• A wants to claim damages from B despite the exemption clause.

2. Issues in the Case

1. Whether B’s exemption clause can protect him from liability for negligence.
2. Whether A can recover damages for the loss of her silk saree under Indian Contract Law.
3. The legal effect of printed conditions in a contract, especially exemption clauses.
4. Whether negligence vitiates contractual exemption clauses.

3. Legal Principles Covered to Support Case Proceedings and Judgements

Relevant Provisions:

• Section 123, Indian Contract Act, 1872 – Fraud and Misrepresentation:
  • Exemption clauses cannot be used to escape liability arising from fraud or negligence.
• Section 74, Indian Contract Act, 1872 – Compensation for Breach:
  • Where a party fails to perform a contract due to negligence, the other party may claim damages.
• General Principles:
  1. Exemption clauses are valid only when they clearly exclude liability and are brought to the notice of the other party.
  2. Negligence or misconduct cannot usually be exempted by a standard clause unless specifically agreed and reasonable.
  3. Delivery of goods for safekeeping imposes a duty of care on the custodian.

Legal Analysis:

1. Nature of Contract:
   • Bailment for dry cleaning creates a duty of care on B.
   • B is expected to take reasonable care to prevent damage.
2. Exemption Clause:
   • Printed conditions on a receipt must be clearly brought to the attention of the bailor to be effective.
   • Exemption clauses cannot protect against gross negligence or failure to exercise ordinary care.
3. Negligence Liability:
   • Since the saree was damaged due to B’s negligence, B cannot rely on the exemption clause to escape liability.
   • A has the right to recover the value of the damaged saree.

Case Law References:

1. Chinnaya v. Ramayya (1882) 7 Mad 238:
   • A carrier could not escape liability for goods lost due to his negligence, even though the contract contained a limiting clause.
2. Ashutosh Mukherjee v. Kali Charan AIR 1921 Cal 283:
   • An exemption clause does not relieve a party from liability arising from negligence unless clearly agreed.

4. Possible Judgement

• B, as the bailee, owed a duty of care to A.
• The silk saree was damaged due to B’s negligence, which is a breach of the duty of care under bailment.
• The exemption clause on the receipt cannot exempt B from liability for negligence.
• A is entitled to recover the value of the damaged saree from B.

Judgement:

• Yes, A can recover damages from B for negligence.
• Exemption clauses are not absolute and cannot excuse negligence unless explicitly agreed and reasonable.
• B’s failure to exercise ordinary care renders him liable under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

About lawgnan:

Understand your rights when dealing with negligence exemption clause cases at Lawgnan.in. If a service provider, like a dry cleaner, damages goods due to negligence, standard exemption clauses on receipts cannot protect them from liability. The law ensures that bailors are entitled to compensation for loss or damage, even if printed conditions attempt to limit responsibility. Lawgnan.in offers comprehensive explanations, case law references, and guidance on enforcing contractual rights. Stay informed and safeguard your interests by knowing when exemption clauses are valid and when negligence overrides contractual limitations. Learn how to claim rightful damages effectively.