Multiple choice

The engagement diamond ring of ‘N’ was stolen by ‘T’, a thief who sold it to ‘J’ a jeweler. ‘N’ filed a suit for recovery of ring against ‘J’. ‘J’ contended that he is ready to pay the price of the ring. Whether the decree for recovery of diamond ring can be refused on the ground that

  1. compensation in terms of money would be adequate relief for the loss of ring

  2. ‘J’ is bonafide purchaser of ring for consideration

  3. there is no jural relation between ‘N’ & ‘J’

  4. None of these
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
D Correct answer
Explanation

In cases of stolen goods, the true owner 'N' is entitled to recovery of the specific property (the diamond ring) even from a bonafide purchaser like 'J'. Monetary compensation is NOT adequate relief because the ring has unique value (engagement ring). Option B is wrong because bonafide purchaser status is no defense for stolen goods under Indian law. Option C is incorrect because there IS a jural relation - 'N' as owner vs 'J' as possessor. Therefore, decree cannot be refused on any of these grounds, making D correct.

Keep practicing — related questions