Whether the State was liable to compensate the respondent?
There can be bailment and existence of a 'relationship of a bailor and bailee in respect of specific property without there being an enforceable contract. Nor is consent indispensable for such a relationship to arise.
Whether or not the delivery of the good took place in this case
Under the provisions of Sections 148 and 149, Contract Act, delivery is necessary to constitute the bailment. It is true that the delivery may be made by doing anything which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the intended bailee; but the mere leaving of the box in a room in the defendant's house, when the plaintiff herself took away the key of that room, cannot certainly amount to delivery within the meaning of the provision in Section 149.
Does the advocate have a lien for his fees on the litigation papers entrusted to him by his client?
A thing to be considered a good under section 171 of the Indian Contract Act, should have marketability and the person to whom it is bailed should be in a position to dispose it of in consideration of money. Goods referred to under s. 171 are saleable goods. In this case there is no scope for converting the case files into money, nor can they be sold to any third party and reliance to s. 171 cannot be placed.