Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay v Sriyanesh Knitters
Rule established
A port trust holding goods as a bailee has a general lien over them for its dues, arising from its statutory powers and the running account character of its business, and may refuse delivery until those dues are paid.
Facts
- Goods were landed at the port and came into the custody of the port trust.
- The importer owed the trust substantial dues, including demurrage and charges relating to other consignments.
- The trust declined to deliver the goods until all its dues were paid.
- The importer contended that the trust could retain the goods only for charges relating to those specific goods, and had no general lien.
Issue
- Whether a port trust may assert a general lien over goods in its custody for dues relating to other consignments of the same person, or is confined to a particular lien for charges on the goods retained.
Held
- The Supreme Court upheld the general lien. The port trust's statutory powers, read together with the nature of its business as a bailee receiving successive consignments on a running account, supported a right to retain goods against the general balance due from the importer. The relationship was not a series of isolated custodial engagements but a continuing one, and the trust was entitled to security for the whole of its dues.
Ratio Decidendi
A general lien may arise not only in the classes named in S.171 of the Indian Contract Act but also by statutory conferment and from the character of a business conducted on a running account. Where a bailee receives successive consignments from the same person under a continuing statutory relationship, the parties may be taken to have contemplated that each consignment answers for the overall balance.
How to use it in an exam
- Modern Indian illustration of a general lien outside the literal list in S.171.
- Use to show that the S.171 categories of banker, factor, wharfinger, attorney and policy broker are not exhaustive where statute or established usage supplies the right.
- Contrast with Hutton v Car Maintenance Co (1915), where even a particular lien failed for want of improvement.
- Note the practical distinction: a particular lien secures charges on the specific goods; a general lien secures the whole account.
Source
Source: AIR 1999 Supreme Court 2947; modern Indian authority on general lien of an institutional bailee; citation and bench checked against Indian Kanoon and reported sources, audit of 12 August 2026
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.