Warranties or conditions may be either express or implied. Sections 14 to 17 of the Act deal with the implied conditions and warranties. An express condition or warranty does not negative a condition or warranty implied by the Act unless inconsistent therewith.
Warranty as to title: (Sec 14)
There are three implied conditions on the part of the seller regarding title to the goods:
1) In case of a sale, the seller has a right to sell the goods and in the case of an agreement to sell, the seller will have the right to sell the goods at the time when the property is to pass;
2) The buyer shall have and enjoy quiet possession of the goods; and
3) Hoods shall be free from any charge or encumbrance.
A bought a motor car from B and used it for four months. B had no title to the car, and forced to return the car to the true owner. Here, as there was a breach of implied condition regarding the title, A could recover the purchase money paid.
Affirm of confectioners’ materials agreed to sell confectionary material of a certain standard to the plaintiffs who received the shipping documents and paid the price. Goods arrived bearing the brand which was infringement of registered trade mark of another manufacturer and were, therefore, detained by customs authorities. It was held that the seller had broken the condition as to the title of the goods.
The above warranties as to title should exist together.
Sale by description (Sec 15):
Where there is a contract for the sale of goods by description, there is an implied condition that the goods shall correspond with the description. Where the buyer gives the description of the goods, for example, he gives the physical appearance of the goods he requires, or gives a brand name, or a particular trade mark, or packing particulars, or the particulars of the ship where goods are to be landed, it is obvious that the goods supplied should correspond with the description. Breach of this warranty entitles the buyer to reject the goods.
Where A bought from B a ship advertised as “Copper fastened” to be taken with all faults without allowance for any defects whatsoever and the ship turned out to be only partially Copper fastened, it was held that A was entitled to reject the goods and recover damages since the goods did not correspond with the description.
Where the plaintiffs bought linen napkins and table clothes described to be set of seventeenth century but subsequently they were found to be set of eighteenth century, it was held that the plaintiffs were entitled to reject the goods.
Sale of sample (Sec 17):
The sale is by sample where terms in the contract express or implied to that effect. There are three implied conditions when the goods are supplied according to the sample.
1) that the bulk shall correspond with the sample in quality
2) that the buyer shall have a reasonable opportunity of comparing the bulk with the sample;
3) that the goods shall be free from any defect. The defect shall not be apparent on reasonable examination. It should be a latent one.
In sale by sample the seller gives an implied warranty that bulk shall correspond to the sample. Where the contract is severable, the buyer can retain that part which corresponds with the sample and reject the other part. Otherwise where the contract is not severable, the buyer may reject the whole or accept the whole and claim damages for the portion which is inferior to the sample. But he cannot retain one part and reject the other part. All the three conditions shall be present. Where instead of sale of brandy by sample, brandy colored with a dye was supplied, it was held that the buyer was entitled to reject the goods.
Sale by sample as well as by description: (Sec 15)
If the sale is by sample as well as by description, it is not sufficient that the bulk of the goods correspond with the sample if the goods do not correspond with the description. Where the sale is by sample as well as by description, the goods shall correspond both with the sample as well as the description. Even if the bulk corresponds with the sample but if the bulk does not correspond with the description the contract is rescinded.
Where Nichol agreed to sell to Godts some oil described as foreign refined rape oil warranted only equal to the sample but contained an admixture of hemp oil, it was held that Godts could reject the goods.