TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOPICS PAGE NO.
o INDEX OF AUTHORITIES...............................................................III – IV
o STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION................................................... V
o STATEMENT OF FACTS.................................................................. 1
o ISSUES RAISED.................................................................................2
o SUMMARY OF ARGUEMENTS....................................................... 3
o ARGUEMENTS ADVANCED............................................................4-9
o PRAYER............................................................................................ 10
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
1. Hon’ble …………… honorable
2. i.e. …………… that is
3. SC …………… Supreme Court
4. Dtd. …………… dated
5. Pvt …………… Private
6. ICA …………… Indian Contract Act 1872
7. Ltd …………… Limited
8. u/s …………… under section
9. s/d …………… signed
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
BOOKS REFERRED
1. Deepa Paturkar and EBC, Avtar Singh’s law of Sale Goods Act, page no. 225,
Eastern Book Company, 2021-06-08
2. Rajesh Kapoor, Avtar Singh – Contract and Specific Relief, page no – 865, EBC ,1
January 2022
3. R.K. Bangia, Indian Contract Act, page no. 455, ALLAHABAD LAW AGENCY;
FIFTEENTH edition, 1 January 2017
CASES REFERRED
• Taj Mahal Hotel v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd AIR 2020 SC 597
• N.R Srinivasa Iyer v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Madrasand Others 1983 SCC 3 458
• M/S D. N. Singh Through Partner Dudheshwar Nath Singh v. Commissioner of Income
Tax 2023 SCC Online SC 646
STATUTES
1. The Indian Contract Act 1872
2. The Sale of Goods Act 1930
WEBSITES
1. www.indiankanoon.org
2.www.legalcrystal.com
3. www.scconline.com
4. www.lawctopus.com
5. www.manupatra.com
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The Plaintiff humbly submits this memorial on the behalf of respondent filed before
this honorable court. The respondent invokes its write jurisdiction under section 9
1
of Code of civil procedure ,1908 states that courts have jurisdiction to try all civil
suits, except those that are expressly or impliedly barred. It sets forth the facts and the
laws on which the claims are based.
1
Sec 9 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The Courts shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their
cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred.
FACTS OF THE CASE
Alpha Gallery, a prestigious art gallery specializing in contemporary art, entered into
a contract of bailment with Beta Security, a reputable security company, for the
safekeeping of valuable artwork during an upcoming exhibition.
The contract stipulated that Beta Security would provide round-the-clock security
surveillance and take all necessary precautions to prevent theft or damage to the
artwork.
During the exhibition, one of the prized artworks, a rare painting by a renowned
artist, was stolen from Alpha Gallery's premises, despite the security measures
implemented by Beta Security.
ISSUES INVOLVED
• Weather there is a breach of contract between Beta Security Pvt Ltd and Alpha
Gallery Pvt Ltd
• Weather there is any Liability of Beta Security Pvt Ltd for the breach of the
contract of bailment and the consequent loss suffered by Alpha Gallery due to
the theft of the valuable artwork.
• Weather there is any liability of Beta Security Pvt Ltd then what is the extent of the
obligation of Beta Security as a bailee to safeguard the bailed goods (the
artwork) under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
Issue 1: Weather there is a breach of contract between Beta Security Pvt Ltd and
Alpha Gallery Pvt Ltd
In the case of Alpha Gallery and Beta Security, Beta Security assumed the role of a bailee,
entrusted with the safekeeping of valuable artwork during an exhibition. As a bailee, Beta Security
owed a duty of care to Alpha Gallery, the bailor, to take reasonable precautions to protect the
artwork from theft or damage. The contract explicitly stated that Beta Security would provide
round-the-clock security surveillance and take all necessary precautions to prevent theft or damage.
The theft of a prized painting during the exhibition is a foreseeable risk in such circumstances, and
Beta Security's failure to implement adequate security measures to mitigate this risk constitutes a
clear breach of their contractual obligations. By failing to fulfill the contractual terms of providing
round-the-clock surveillance and taking all necessary precautions, Beta Security breached the duty
of care owed to Alpha Gallery as the bailee, potentially rendering them liable for the loss of the
stolen artwork and any associated damages.
Issue 2: Weather there is any Liability of Beta Security Pvt Ltd for the breach of the
contract of bailment and the consequent loss suffered by Alpha Gallery due to the
theft of the valuable artwork.
Beta Security, acting as the bailee, is liable for breaching the contract of bailment with Alpha
Gallery and the consequent loss suffered due to the theft of the valuable artwork. According to the
Indian Contract Act, 1872, Beta Security had a duty to take reasonable care of the bailed artwork
and return it upon completion of the exhibition. However, despite the contractual stipulation of
providing round-the-clock security surveillance and taking all necessary precautions, Beta Security
failed to fulfill this obligation, allowing the theft of the artwork from Alpha Gallery's premises.
This failure to exercise reasonable care and comply with contractual obligations amounts to
negligence under Section 151 of the Act, rendering Beta Security liable for the loss incurred by
Alpha Gallery as the bailor.
Issue 3: Weather there is any liability of Beta Security Pvt Ltd then what is the extent
of the obligation of Beta Security as a bailee to safeguard the bailed goods (the
artwork) under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Beta Security, as the bailee, had a high degree of obligation to safeguard the bailed goods (the
valuable artwork) under the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Section 152 of the Act requires a bailee to
take as much care of the bailed goods as a prudent person would take of their own goods of similar
value. Given that the artwork in question was a rare and valuable painting, Beta Security, being a
reputable security company, should have exercised the utmost care and diligence in safeguarding it,
as a reasonable and prudent person would have done with their own precious possessions. This duty
is further emphasized by the case of Taj Mahal Hotel v. United India Insurance Company Ltd.,
which established that a bailee has a duty to maintain premises in a safe condition to prevent loss,
damage, or theft of goods.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
Issue 1: Weather there is a breach of contract between Beta Security
Pvt Ltd and Alpha Gallery Pvt Ltd
• It is humbly submitted that beta security as a bailee, Beta Security owed a duty of
care to Alpha Gallery to take reasonable precautions to protect the artwork from
theft or damage. The contract stipulated that Beta Security would provide round-
the-clock security surveillance and take all necessary precautions.
• As a bailee, Beta Security owed a duty of care to Alpha Gallery to take reasonable
precautions to protect the artwork from theft or damage. The contract stipulated that
Beta Security would provide round-the-clock security surveillance and take all
necessary precautions.
• The theft of valuable artwork during an exhibition is a foreseeable risk, and Beta
Security should have taken appropriate measures to mitigate this risk as per the
contractual terms. The failure of which is a clear breach of contractual terms by
Beta Security.
Issue 2: Weather there is any Liability of Beta Security Pvt Ltd for the breach
of the contract of bailment and the consequent loss suffered by Alpha Gallery
due to the theft of the valuable artwork.
• It is humbly submitted that Beta Security is liable for the breach of the contract of bailment
and the consequent loss suffered by Alpha Gallery due to the theft of the valuable artwork.
According to Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, 2 making it a breach in the
contract of bailment.
• In the present case, Alpha Gallery (bailor) delivered the valuable artwork to Beta Security
(bailee) for the purpose of safekeeping during the exhibition. Beta Security, as the bailee,
had a duty to take reasonable care of the bailed goods (artwork) and return them to Alpha
Gallery upon the completion of the exhibition. However, Beta Security failed to fulfil its
obligation by allowing the theft of the valuable artwork from Alpha Gallery's premises,
despite the contractual stipulation of providing round-the-clock security surveillance and
taking all necessary precautions.
• According to Section 151 of the Indian Contract Act, 18723,The theft of the valuable
artwork from Alpha Gallery's premises clearly indicates a breach of duty of care by Beta
Security, amounting to negligence. Therefore, Beta Security is liable for the loss suffered
by Alpha Gallery due to the theft ohe valuable artwork.
2
Section 148 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, 2a
bailment is defined as "the delivery of goods by one person to another for some purpose, upon a contract that they shall,
when the purpose is accomplished, be 2returned or otherwise disposed of according to the directions of the person
delivering them."
3Section 151 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872
In all cases of bailment the bailee is bound to take as much care of the goods bailed to him as a man of ordinary prudence
would, under similar circumstances, take of his own goods of the same bulk, quality and value as the goods bailed
Issue 3: Weather there is any liability of Beta Security Pvt Ltd then what is
the extent of the obligation of Beta Security as a bailee to safeguard the
bailed goods (the artwork) under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
• It is humbly submitted that Beta Security, as a bailee, had a high degree of
obligation to safeguard the bailed goods (the artwork) under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Section 152 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 4
• In the present case, the artwork in question was a rare and valuable painting by a renowned
artist. Beta Security, being a reputable security company, should have exercised the utmost
care and diligence in safeguarding such a precious and valuable artwork, as a reasonable
and prudent person would have done with their own valuable possessions.
• In Taj Mahal Hotel v. United India Insurance Company Ltd5. And Others where The bailee
has a duty to keep its premises in a condition of safety to prevent loss, damage, or theft of
goods. The failure to return the vehicle raises a prima facie case of negligence against the
hotel. Which here is similar to the case at hand where due to the absence of action from
beta company the artwork was stolen holding them primarily liable.
• Furthermore, Section 153 of the Indian Contract Act, 18726.This provision implies that
Beta Security is liable not only for its own negligence but also for any negligence or
omission on the part of its employees or agents responsible for providing security during
the exhibition.
• In conclusion, considering the high value and rarity of the artwork, and the contractual
obligation to provide round-the-clock security surveillance and take all necessary
precautions, Beta Security had a heightened duty of care as a bailee to safeguard the bailed
goods (the artwork). The failure to prevent the theft of the valuable artwork constitutes a
breach of this duty, rendering Beta Security liable for the loss suffered by Alpha Gallery
4Section 152 of the Indian Contract Act 1872
The bailee is bound to take as much care of the goods bailed to him as a man of ordinary prudence would, under similar circumstances,
take of his own goods of the same bulk, quality and value as the goods bailed.
5
AIR 2020 SC 597
6Section 153 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872
The bailee is responsible not only for his own acts, omissions and negligence, but also for the acts, omissions and negligence of his
agents or servants who are employed by him in respect of the performance of the bailment.
PRAYER
In light of the aforementioned submissions, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may be pleased to:
• To hold Beta Security liable for the breach of the contract of bailment and the
consequent loss suffered by Alpha Gallery due to the theft of the valuable
artwork;
• To direct Beta Security to compensate Alpha Gallery for the loss suffered due
to the theft of the valuable artwork;
To grant such other relief(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in
the circumstances of the case
COUNCIL OF DEFENDANT
