Contracts of indemnity and contracts of guarantee are two important types of agreements under the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Though both involve promises to protect against loss, they are legally different in terms of the number of parties involved, the nature of liability, and how they are enforced. These differences are crucial to understand for anyone studying contract law or dealing with financial or legal obligations.
Parties Involved
The most basic difference is the number of parties involved. A contract of indemnity involves only two parties: the indemnifier (the one who promises to cover the loss) and the indemnified (the one who is protected against loss).
On the other hand, a contract of guarantee involves three parties: the creditor, the principal debtor, and the surety (who promises to repay if the debtor defaults).
You can also read the blog of Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018)
For more information, visit [Aashayein Enquiry Section]
Nature of Contracts Between the Parties
In a contract of guarantee, there are three relationships: between the creditor and the debtor, the creditor and the surety, and an implied or express relationship between the debtor and the surety. In contrast, an indemnity contract only involves the relationship between the indemnifier and the indemnified.
Primary vs. Secondary Liability
Another difference is the type of liability. In a contract of guarantee, the principal debtor holds the primary liability, while the surety holds a secondary liability, which means the surety becomes liable only if the debtor fails to pay. In a contract of indemnity, there is no such division liability lies directly on the indemnifier once the loss occurs.
Right to Recover Money Paid
In indemnity, the indemnifier cannot recover any amount paid from the indemnified. However, in a guarantee, once the surety pays the creditor, they gain the right to recover the amount from the principal debtor. This right was discussed in Radha Kanta Pal v. United Bank of India Ltd. (AIR 1955 Cal 217), where the court recognized the surety’s right to be reimbursed.
Complexity and Sub-Contracts
Contracts of guarantee are generally more complex as they involve three parties and three contracts, while contracts of indemnity are simpler, involving only two parties and two contracts.
When Liability Arises
In a contract of indemnity, the liability arises only after a specific loss or event takes place. In contrast, in a contract of guarantee, the liability already exists from the beginning and becomes active when the principal debtor defaults.
Right to Sue
Lastly, in indemnity, the indemnifier cannot sue a third party until the indemnified assigns their rights. But in a guarantee, the surety can directly sue the principal debtor after paying the creditor no need for any formal assignment of rights.
Conclusion
While both contracts aim to provide financial protection, the key differences lie in the parties involved, the structure of liability, and legal rights following payment. Understanding these differences helps in properly identifying the nature of the contract and applying the right legal principles. Contracts of guarantee are more detailed and provide additional safeguards like recovery rights for the surety, while contracts of indemnity are more straightforward but limited in scope. These distinctions are essential for upholding fair and effective enforcement in contractual relationships.
