Finder of Goods, Lien & Pledge — Contract II (Special Contracts) Notes

Finder of Goods

You find a diamond on a shop floor and hand it to the shopkeeper to trace the owner; no owner appears. Who keeps it? English law’s famous answer (Bridges v. Hawkesworth, 1851) was: the finder, against everyone but the true owner. The Indian Act builds on that — a finder is treated as a bailee, with defined rights and a limited power to sell.

What are a finder’s rights and duties?

A finder of goods is a person who finds goods belonging to another and takes them into custody. He did not agree to anything, yet the law treats him as a bailee (s.71) and gives him the responsibilities of one, plus special rights.

Duties of a finder.

• To take reasonable care of the goods, like any bailee (s.151).
• Not to use them for his own purpose.
• To make reasonable efforts to find the true owner; until he does, he must not appropriate the goods.
• To return the goods (and any increase) to the true owner when found.

Rights of a finder.

• Right to retain the goods against the whole world except the true owner (s.168, first part) — his possession is good title against everyone else.
• Right to reimbursement of expenses (s.168). He may retain the goods against the owner until he receives compensation for trouble and expense voluntarily incurred to preserve the goods and find the owner. He cannot sue for these expenses — but he has a lien.
• Right to any reward offered by the owner (s.168) — and he may sue for a specific reward that was announced, and retain the goods until it is paid.
• Right of sale (s.169). The finder may sell the goods when: (a) the owner cannot with reasonable diligence be found, or refuses to pay the lawful charges; and (b) either the goods are in danger of perishing or losing the greater part of their value, or the lawful charges of the finder amount to two-thirds or more of the value of the goods.

🧩 WORKED EXAMPLE — the finder who spends to preserve

Facts. F finds a valuable dog, spends ₹2,000 feeding and advertising for the owner. The owner, O, appears and demands the dog but refuses to pay F’s expenses. F wants to recover the ₹2,000, and asks whether he can sell the dog.

Rule. Under s.168 a finder cannot sue for expenses but has a lien to retain the goods until paid; under s.169 he may sell only if the owner cannot be found or refuses charges and the goods are perishing or charges ≥ two-thirds of value.

Apply. F cannot bring a suit for ₹2,000, but he may keep the dog until O pays. Since O has appeared and the dog is not perishing and ₹2,000 is far below two-thirds of a valuable dog’s value, F cannot sell.

Conclusion. F may retain the dog by lien until his ₹2,000 is paid, but may not sell it.

Section 169, Indian Contract Act 1872: “When a thing which is commonly the subject of sale is lost, if the owner cannot with reasonable diligence be found, or if he refuses, upon demand, to pay the lawful charges of the finder, the finder may sell it — (1) when the thing is in danger of perishing or of losing the greater part of its value, or (2) when the lawful charges of the finder … amount to two-thirds of its value.”

In Simple Terms: A finder is a bailee. He must guard the goods and hunt for the owner; in return he can keep them against everyone but the owner, hold a lien for his expenses (though he cannot sue for them), claim a promised reward, and sell only in the two narrow s.169 situations.

flowchart TD
    A["Finder of goods (s.71 - as bailee)"]
    A --> B["Duties"]
    B --> B1["Reasonable care"]
    B --> B2["Find true owner"]
    B --> B3["Return goods"]
    A --> C["Rights"]
    C --> C1["Retain vs all but owner s.168"]
    C --> C2["Lien for expenses (cannot sue)"]
    C --> C3["Reward s.168"]
    C --> C4["Sell s.169 (2 situations only)"]
    classDef box fill:#e8f0fe,stroke:#333,color:#111;
    class A,B,C,B1,B2,B3,C1,C2,C3,C4 box;

Case Laws

• Hollins v. Fowler (1875) — dealing with found goods inconsistently with the owner’s rights is conversion.
• Newman v. Bourne & Hollingsworth (1915) — a finder must take reasonable care of the goods; a shop that found a customer’s brooch and lost it was liable.
• Bridges v. Hawkesworth (1851) — the finder of goods has title good against all but the true owner.

Back to Top

Lien and its Kinds

A tailor keeps your suit until you pay for the stitching; a banker keeps your securities until you clear all your accounts with him. Both are “liens”, but they are not the same size. Telling the particular lien from the general lien is one of the most repeated questions in this unit.

What is a lien?

A lien is the right of a person in possession of another’s goods to retain them until a debt or claim connected with them (or, sometimes, a general balance) is satisfied. It is a right to keep, not (by itself) to sell.

There are two kinds:

• Particular lien (s.170). A bailee who has, by his labour or skill, done something to the goods that improves them or adds value, may retain those particular goods until he is paid for that specific work. It attaches only to the goods worked on, and only for charges relating to those goods. Example: a watch-repairer’s lien over the watch he mended. It requires that the work be complete and that no credit was agreed.
• General lien (s.171). Certain classes of persons may retain any goods of the other in their possession for a general balance of account — not just charges relating to those particular goods. The Act names them: bankers, factors, wharfingers, attorneys of a High Court, and policy-brokers. Others may acquire a general lien only by an express contract.

How they differ:

🧩 WORKED EXAMPLE — which lien?

Facts. A jeweller polishes A’s ring (charge ₹500, unpaid). Separately, A’s banker holds A’s fixed-deposit receipts; A owes the bank on an unrelated overdraft.

Rule. A particular lien (s.170) lets a workman retain the very goods he worked on for that work’s charges; a general lien (s.171) lets a banker retain any goods for a general balance.

Apply. The jeweller may retain the ring until ₹500 is paid (particular lien). The banker may retain the deposit receipts for the overdraft balance, though unrelated (general lien).

Conclusion. Both may retain — one under s.170, the other under s.171.

Section 171, Indian Contract Act 1872: “Bankers, factors, wharfingers, attorneys of a High Court and policy-brokers may, in the absence of a contract to the contrary, retain, as a security for a general balance of account, any goods bailed to them; but no other persons have a right to retain, as a security for such balance, goods bailed to them, unless there is an express contract to that effect.”

In Simple Terms: A lien is the right to hold on to goods until you are paid. A particular lien covers only the goods you actually worked on, for that work; a general lien (bankers, factors, wharfingers, attorneys, policy-brokers) covers any goods for the whole outstanding balance.

flowchart TD
    A["Lien (right to retain goods)"]
    A --> B["Particular lien s.170"]
    B --> B1["Only goods worked on"]
    B --> B2["For that work's charges"]
    A --> C["General lien s.171"]
    C --> C1["Any goods in possession"]
    C --> C2["For general balance"]
    C --> C3["Bankers, factors, wharfingers,<br/>attorneys, policy-brokers"]
    classDef box fill:#e8f0fe,stroke:#333,color:#111;
    class A,B,C,B1,B2,C1,C2,C3 box;

Case Laws

• Hutton v. Car Maintenance Co. (1915) — a garage that only maintained a car (without improving it) had no particular lien; work must add value.
• Board of Trustees, Port of Bombay v. Sriyanesh Knitters (1995) — the Port Trust had a general lien over goods for its dues by statute/contract.

Back to Top

Pledge — Definition, Essentials, Nature

A farmer needs cash before the harvest, so he pawns his wife’s gold bangles at the local lender. He does not sell them — he hands them over as security, to be redeemed when he repays. That is a pledge: a special kind of bailment, built for lending against goods.

What is a pledge?

A pledge (or pawn) is the bailment of goods as security for the payment of a debt or the performance of a promise. It is simply one species of bailment — everything true of bailment is true of pledge, plus the extra rights a lender needs (to hold and, ultimately, to sell).

Section 172 defines it. The bailment of goods as security for payment of a debt or performance of a promise is a pledge. The bailor (who pledges) is the pawnor; the bailee (who takes the goods as security) is the pawnee.

Essentials of a pledge — each explained:

• Delivery of goods (possession). As in any bailment, possession of the goods must pass to the pawnee — actual or constructive delivery. Without delivery there is no pledge.
• In pursuance of a contract. The delivery must be for the purpose of security, under a contract (express or implied).
• For securing a debt or promise. The very object must be security — this is what makes it a pledge rather than an ordinary bailment for custody or repair.
• Movable goods. Only movable property (goods, documents of title) can be pledged; immovables are mortgaged, not pledged. Note also hypothecation — a charge over movable goods where the goods stay in the borrower’s possession and no delivery is made; because a pledge requires delivery of possession to the pawnee, hypothecation is not a pledge.
• Ownership stays with the pawnor. The pawnee gets a special property (a right to hold and sell for the debt); general ownership remains with the pawnor, who can redeem.

Nature. The pawnee has only a special property (a special interest to secure the debt), not general ownership. He may retain the goods, and on default sell them after notice, but must return them on redemption. This special-property idea is what separates pledge from sale.

🧩 WORKED EXAMPLE — pledge or bailment?

Facts. A hands his gold chain to a lender who advances ₹40,000 against it, to be returned when A repays. Separately, A hands the same chain to a jeweller only to clean it.

Rule. A bailment for security of a debt is a pledge (s.172); a bailment for another purpose (custody, repair) is an ordinary bailment.

Apply. The lender holds the chain as security for the ₹40,000 — a pledge, with a power of sale on default. The jeweller holds it only to clean — an ordinary bailment, with a particular lien for the cleaning charge.

Conclusion. The first is a pledge; the second is a bailment.

Section 172, Indian Contract Act 1872: “The bailment of goods as security for payment of a debt or performance of a promise is called ‘pledge’. The bailor is in this case called the ‘pawnor’. The bailee is called the ‘pawnee’.”

In Simple Terms: A pledge is bailment done for security — you hand goods to a lender to back a loan. He can hold them and, on default, sell them after notice, but you stay the owner and can redeem.

flowchart TD
    A["Pledge (s.172)"]
    A --> B["Pawnor<br/>(gives goods, keeps ownership)"]
    A --> C["Pawnee<br/>(special property only)"]
    A --> D["Essentials"]
    D --> D1["Delivery of possession"]
    D --> D2["To secure debt/promise"]
    D --> D3["Movable goods"]
    C --> E["Retain + sell on default"]
    B --> F["Right to redeem"]
    classDef box fill:#e8f0fe,stroke:#333,color:#111;
    class A,B,C,D,D1,D2,D3,E,F box;

Case Laws

• Lallan Prasad v. Rahmat Ali (1967) — a pawnee who cannot return the pledged goods cannot recover the debt; delivery and return are central to pledge.
• Morvi Mercantile Bank v. Union of India (1965) — documents of title to goods (e.g. railway receipts) can be pledged; delivery of the documents is delivery of the goods.

Back to Top

Pledge by a Non-owner

The general rule is common sense: you cannot pledge what you do not own. But commerce would grind to a halt if a bank had to trace every pledger’s title, so the Act carves out several situations where even a non-owner can make a pledge that binds the true owner. Those exceptions are the whole question.

Who can pledge?

The basic rule: a valid pledge is normally made by the owner of the goods, or by someone with the owner’s authority. A pledge by a non-owner is generally invalid against the true owner (an application of nemo dat quod non habet — no one gives what he does not have). But the Act and the Sale of Goods Act recognise exceptions to protect a bona fide pawnee:

• Pledge by a mercantile agent (s.178). A mercantile agent who is, with the owner’s consent, in possession of goods or documents of title can make a valid pledge in the ordinary course of business, provided the pawnee acts in good faith and without notice of the agent’s want of authority.
• Pledge by a person in possession under a voidable contract (s.178A). One who obtained goods under a voidable contract (e.g. by fraud) but which has not yet been rescinded can make a valid pledge, if the pawnee acts in good faith and without notice of the defect in title.
• Pledge by a person with a limited interest (s.179). Where a person pledges goods in which he has only a limited interest, the pledge is valid to the extent of that interest.
• Pledge by a seller or buyer in possession after sale (SGA s.30). A seller left in possession after sale, or a buyer in possession before property passes, can make a valid pledge to a bona fide pledgee.
• Pledge by a co-owner in sole possession — a co-owner in sole possession, with the others’ consent, may pass a good title/pledge to a bona fide taker (analogous to SGA s.28).

🧩 WORKED EXAMPLE — pledge by a fraudulent buyer

Facts. X obtains a diamond ring from O by fraud (a voidable contract). Before O rescinds, X pledges the ring to a pawnbroker P, who takes it in good faith and without notice of the fraud. O then discovers the fraud and claims the ring from P.

Rule. Under s.178A, a person in possession under a voidable contract not yet rescinded can make a valid pledge to a good-faith pawnee without notice.

Apply. X’s title was voidable, not void, and O had not rescinded before the pledge; P took in good faith without notice.

Conclusion. P’s pledge is valid; O can recover only subject to P’s interest (must redeem to get the ring).

Section 178A, Indian Contract Act 1872: “When the pawnor has obtained possession of the goods pledged by him under a contract voidable under section 19 or section 19A, but the contract has not been rescinded at the time of the pledge, the pawnee acquires a good title to the goods, provided he acts in good faith and without notice of the pawnor’s defect of title.”

In Simple Terms: Normally only the owner can pledge. But a mercantile agent (s.178), a fraudster whose voidable title is not yet rescinded (s.178A), a person with a limited interest (s.179), and sellers/buyers/co-owners in possession can each make a pledge that binds the owner, provided the pawnee is honest and unaware of the defect.

flowchart TD
    A["Rule: only owner can pledge<br/>(nemo dat)"]
    A --> B["Exceptions - valid pledge by non-owner"]
    B --> C["Mercantile agent s.178"]
    B --> D["Voidable title not rescinded s.178A"]
    B --> E["Limited interest s.179"]
    B --> F["Seller/buyer in possession SGA s.30"]
    B --> G["Co-owner in sole possession"]
    classDef box fill:#e8f0fe,stroke:#333,color:#111;
    class A,B,C,D,E,F,G box;

Case Laws

• Morvi Mercantile Bank v. Union of India (1965) — a pledge of documents of title by a mercantile agent in possession is valid.
• Purshottam Das v. Union of India (1967) — a bona fide pawnee taking from one in possession under a voidable title acquires a good title (s.178A).

Back to Top

Rights and Duties of Pawnor and Pawnee

A pawnee is a lender holding someone’s goods, so the law must balance two interests: let him recover his money (retain, and if need be sell), but protect the pawnor’s ownership (notice before sale, right to redeem, surplus returned). Section 176 — sale only after notice — is where most marks sit.

What are the pawnee’s and pawnor’s rights and duties?

Rights of the pawnee.

• Right of retainer (ss.173–174). The pawnee may retain the goods not only for the debt but also for interest and necessary expenses (s.173); but not, without a contract, for any other debt (s.174).
• Right to recover extraordinary expenses (s.175). He may recover extraordinary expenses incurred to preserve the goods (though for these he has no right to retain, only to recover).
• Right on default (s.176) — the crucial one. If the pawnor defaults, the pawnee may either:
  • sue for the debt and retain the goods as collateral security; or
  • sell the goods after giving the pawnor reasonable notice of the sale.
  • If the sale proceeds fall short, the pawnor is still liable for the balance; if they exceed the debt, the pawnee must return the surplus. A sale without notice is invalid and makes the pawnee liable.

Duties of the pawnee.

• Take reasonable care of the goods (as a bailee, s.151).
• Not to use the goods (unless authorised).
• To return the goods on redemption; and to return any accretion/increase.
• To give reasonable notice before any sale (s.176).

Rights of the pawnor.

• Right of redemption (s.177). The pawnor may redeem the goods by paying the debt at any time before the actual sale, even after the stipulated time has passed (paying any expenses arising from his default). This right of redemption is the pawnor’s key protection.
• Right to the return of the goods and any increase, and to any surplus on sale.

🧩 WORKED EXAMPLE — sale without notice

Facts. A pawns his motorcycle to P for a loan of ₹30,000. A defaults. Without giving A any notice, P sells the motorcycle for ₹50,000.

Rule. Under s.176, a pawnee may sell only after reasonable notice; a sale without notice is invalid, and the pawnee must account for any surplus.

Apply. P sold without notice, so the sale is not a valid exercise of the s.176 power; and in any event P must return the ₹20,000 surplus.

Conclusion. The sale is bad for want of notice; P is liable to A (and cannot keep the surplus).

Section 176, Indian Contract Act 1872: “If the pawnor makes default … the pawnee may bring a suit against the pawnor upon the debt or promise, and retain the goods pledged as a collateral security; or he may sell the thing pledged, on giving the pawnor reasonable notice of the sale.”

In Simple Terms: A pawnee can hold the goods for his debt, interest and expenses, and on default either sue or sell — but only after reasonable notice, returning any surplus. The pawnor can redeem the goods by paying up any time before the sale.

flowchart TD
    A["Pledge parties"]
    A --> B["Pawnee's rights"]
    B --> B1["Retainer ss.173-174"]
    B --> B2["Extraordinary expenses s.175"]
    B --> B3["On default s.176:<br/>sue OR sell after notice"]
    A --> C["Pawnor's rights"]
    C --> C1["Redeem before sale s.177"]
    C --> C2["Surplus on sale"]
    classDef box fill:#e8f0fe,stroke:#333,color:#111;
    class A,B,C,B1,B2,B3,C1,C2 box;

Case Laws

• [C-4] Lallan Prasad v. Rahmat Ali (1967) — the pawnee must be able to return the goods on payment; failure to preserve them defeats his claim for the debt.
• Prabhat Bank v. Babu Ram (1966) — a pawnee selling without the reasonable notice required by s.176 is liable to the pawnor.

Back to Top

Bailment vs Pledge

Pledge is a kind of bailment, so they share DNA — possession moves, ownership stays. The examiner wants you to show what makes pledge special: its single purpose (security) and its power of sale.

How do bailment and pledge differ?

Both involve delivery of goods without transfer of ownership. But pledge is the narrower, security-driven species. Open the answer with “pledge is a kind of bailment”, then contrast:

Section 148 & 172 (read together): every pledge is a bailment (delivery of goods without transfer of ownership), but only a bailment for security of a debt or promise is a pledge, and only a pawnee gets the s.176 power of sale.

In Simple Terms: All pledges are bailments, but not all bailments are pledges. A pledge is specifically for security and gives the holder a power to sell on default; an ordinary bailment can be for any purpose and gives, at most, a lien to hold on.

flowchart TD
    A["Delivery of goods,<br/>ownership retained"]
    A --> B["Bailment s.148<br/>any purpose, lien only"]
    A --> C["Pledge s.172<br/>security only, power of sale s.176"]
    B --> D["Pledge is a KIND of bailment"]
    C --> D
    classDef box fill:#e8f0fe,stroke:#333,color:#111;
    class A,B,C,D box;

Case Laws

• Lallan Prasad v. Rahmat Ali (1967) — highlights the pledge-specific duty to preserve and return the security.

Back to Top

📄 Full notes + Question Bank (₹199) — every topic in depth, model answers to all past KSLU questions, in one printable PDF. Get the bundle · 10 Solved Problems · All Contract II (Special Contracts) topics