Quasi Contract | Indian Contract Act, 1872 | Law Guru
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 окт 2024
- In this video we are talking about Quasi Contract (Meaning, Features, Essentials, Provisions and Differences between Contract and Quasi Contract in one video), Section 68 - Section 72 Under Indian Contract Act, 1872 in English as well as in Hindi, so must watch to get good knowledge in the subject of Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Notes of the Video
/
PDF Notes of the video :- lawguruofficia...
Subscribe our RUclips channel and get more knowledge of different laws on a single platform.
Law Guru
/ lawguruofficial
Like our Facebook page
/ lawguruofficial
Follow us on Instagram
/ lawguru_anuragrishi
Subscribe us on Telegram
t.me/lawguruof...
Go to our Website (for more notes & Videos)
lawguruofficia...
There are some more videos related to different topics, must watch
Contingent Contract
• Contingent Contract | ...
Mistake of Facts & Mistake of Law
• Mistake of Facts & Mis...
Maintenance Under Cr P C
• Maintenance Under Cr P...
The Family Courts Act, 1984 (Complete Lecture)
• The Family Courts Act,...
Power of Courts under Cr.P.C
• Power of Courts under ...
Coercion, Undue Influence, Fraud, Misrepresentation
• Coercion, Undue Influe...
Consent and Free Consent
• Consent and Free Conse...
Introduction of Indian Contract Act, 1872
• Introduction of Indian...
Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (Complete lecture)
• Hindu Adoptions and Ma...
Introduction of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
• Introduction of Code o...
Who is Muslim and to whom Muslim laws apply
• Who is Muslim and to w...
Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 (Complete lecture)
• Hindu Minority and Gua...
Mandatory and Directory Provisions
• Mandatory and Director...
Guidelines for AIBE (All India Bar Exam)
• Guidelines for AIBE (A...
AIBE XV Answer Key (Complete question paper with answers)
• AIBE XV Answer Key (Co...
Don't add the background music
Thanks for your suggestion.
Bhai maza aa rha but sun ne mai, acha sound kr rha ❤
@@adityavishwakarma3402 nacho firr
The biggest example is arrange marriage .... 😂😂😂....
No proposal no acceptance only consideration and enforcement by law
According to section 69 of indian contract act 1872, states that payment by the interested person which means that A has the right to be reimbursed from B as he saved his property.
Very good
But I have a question.
There must be communication between both the parties.
Case - Laxman vs Gowri Dutt.
Then how can he claim for compensation?
@@Kohale_P ISME ACCEPTENCE AUR PROMISE NHI HOTE quasai contract hai ye
@@devoid1740okhh thnku soo much , toh mtlb b bound h compensate krne ke liye ??
Thnx uh sir .. uh explain so wonderful nd clear.. everything goes in my head nd ur notes are very much helpful 👍😇
Thank you so much for your appreciation.
😊🤔
Hy
🤗
Uh😂😮
The lecture was extremely helpful, Thank you but I found the background music very annoying. It somehow breaks the concentration.
Sorry for disturbance and we have stopped using background music now.
Depend krta h wo kis reason se compansation mag raha hai.
Agr uski property bachane me kuch kharch aya hai to use uska compensation milega.
Baki agr use personally kuch harm hua to wo claim nahi kr skta.
This is my personal conclusion
Bcz sir sec 70 says that it must be non gratituously done so rhe act of that man was gratituous so he is not entitled to take the money from b
Very good
It starts at 1:08
Tq
Answer of the your last question is section 69
Because A was interested in b's property ....for this a helped b 🙂
Very good keep it up
@@LawGuruOfficial Thank you sir... 😁
@@anayustatusworld2925 Your welcome
no sir b person is not bound because there is no agreement
Very Good keep it up.
Thank you sir
Sir Please share Important question for CMA
Every contract is an agreement, but every agreement is not always a contract. An agreement creating a legal obligation is said to be enforceable by law. The parties to an agreement must be bound to perform their promises and in case of default by either of them, must intend to sue. For an agreement to be enforceable by law there should be legal obligation instead of social, moral or religious obligation.
Nice explanation of the concepts.
A has done a non-gratuitous act which when B enjoys (I.e. accepting the acts of A in firefighting), B is bound to make compensation to B for his act as per Sec-70, Quasi contract
*B is bound to make compensation to A
i think sec 71 @@newoneization
@@sarthaksingh7271noo that's sec 70 only
As there was no expense made by A.
I think A cannot claim compensation from B,
A intentionally save B's property for getting compensation if A spent or sacrifice anything for saving his property then A would be eligible for claiming compensation from B
If I be wrong then please correct me who have better knowledge
Yes A is entitled to get compensated by B it he’s saving his property under section 69 provision of this act (quasi contract) because he’s entitled to get compensated by right or law which is already enforced and he is entitled to recieve money on his behalf from B because he saved his property neither there’s is contract nor agreement but in quasi he can do for which is entitled to be compensated in anyways by B.
Thankyou for wonderful explanation ❤
Very good keep going.
Yes
Yes he is entitled
Because B are interested in A, s property and competition. B spend his power to put out the fire so he is entitled to earn competition
good keep it up
Section 69 says A person who is interested in the payment of money which another is bound by law to pay., and who therefore pays it is entitled to be reimbursed by other.
exactly
थैंक्स ब्रो अध्यापक ने पढ़ाया था मगर अच्छे से समझ में नहीं आया था आपने सब समझा दिया!👍🏼
Very helpful keep going will definitely share and support .Good content
Thank you so much.
Sir ka koi jawabb nhiii mtlvv mai kya hi boluu😭tysmm sirr aapko bhgwan aapke mehnat ka fal dey just becoz uhh deserve this..mai bta nhii sktii ki maine aapke padhai se kch samjha hh tysmm sir meri dill se nikli h duaa aapke liye zarror puri hogii...🙏🏻😘
Thank you so much.
Ap logo ki duae or support milta rahe bas or kuch nahi chahiye.
or apka bohot bohot thank you hmare lie dua karne ke lie.
Your way of Explanation is really amazing and supportive not to understand but also for exams.
Thank you so much for your appreciation.
Comment for RUclips team,..... educational video mein ad mat dala karo focus kharab hota h
😂😂😂😂tab paise kahaa se milenge teachers ko...
Aur hack version mai to use kr raha hu... if you want this then tell me. I will send that🎉
In my point of view if b done this work voluntery by his will a is not entiled by law to pay him compensetion but in time fire fighting he use some money like buying pipe aur water then b is entiled by law to pay him
Very good keep it up.
Very well explained...THANKING YOU SIR for your valuable effort 🙏
Thank you so much for your appreciation.
Section 70 of indian contract act applies.. between A and B
Thank you so much sr ji
God bless you abundantly 😇
Because your all videos is very helpful even i understand easily
Your teaching is very good 😊
Again thank you so much sr
Thank you so much for your appreciation and god bless you too.
sir yah answer is k qustion mai all contracts are agreements but all agreements are not contract thk hain
Yes theek hai.
I want to discuss with you on procedural mandatory provision how may be contact with you to get your expert opinion with ruling if any
You can direct message me on Facebook, Instagram or Whatsapp.
Yes as according to 69 he helped I'm because he was interested in compensation or payment of agrrived or B in this case
Very good keep it up.
Yes A is entiled to take compensation from because on bhehalf quasi contract As here is consideration enforceable by law
Very good keep it up
Yes A kd entitled to take compensation from B on behalf of quesi contact as hise is consideration enforceable by law
Very good.
Please don't apply that background music
YEs we have removed now.
Very well explained sir..... 🥰🥰
Thank you so much
Yes A is entitled to take compensation from B because B was interested in his property
Very good
Explanation acha h..but plz dont add background music😊
Thank you so much and we are not using it anymore.
Thank you sir for this video 🎉🎉🎉🎉😊😊it is very helpful 🎉🎉
Your welcome
Yes sir A is entitled to get his compensation bcoz A is totally saving B's property
Very good keep it up.
Background music 🙄
Yes A was entitle to get compensation because he save the thing of B.,no matters intention without intention of A because fire is accidentally brune in house
Very good keep ii up.
sec 70 because A helps to protect B property because from the very start his intention to get compensation.
Very good.
Please do not add this background music your videos are so nice but this music is so irritated
Sorry for disturbance
A is not untitiled , A/Q salmond - Nuisance consist lawful justification . We can't cause fire 🔥....
No.. he is not entitled to get money because section 70 says do something non gratutosly..
Very good keep it up.
Yes sir I think entitled hai ,kyu ki wo intentionally uske ghr ka aag bujha Raha hai
Keep it up.
Background music is distracting..please dont add it.
Sorry for disturbance, we are not using it now.
He explains every topic in depth....but my problem is with the music backside....it distracted me many times
Sorry for the disturbance but we have removed the background music now. It was used in the starting videos.
Frankly speaking I was so focused that I didn’t knew there was a music in background, noticed after reading your comment
@@harshaldabhade8862 Thank you so much
Please remove back ground sound and music
@@updateinformation8202 okay
No entitle to receive money because A have a intention to protect B's property
Very good.
Thank you sir ☺Well explained 💯🤗
Your welcome
No A will not entitled for that money, because his intention is gratuitous.
Very good
No A can not claim compensation ,because there is no consideration
Very good.
A is entitled to take compensation from B.. According to Quasi contract
Thanks
Well explained ♥️🇵🇰
very good keep it up and thank you so much
Ha sir entitled h
Yes, A is entitled to take compensation from B.
On behalf of quasi contract..
As here is consideration
Enforceable by law.....
Thankuhhh sir for explaining the quasi contract in a best manner.....😊😍
Thank you so much for your appreciation.
Is this answer is correct 🤔
@@LawGuruOfficial sir is this answer correct I don't think it is
No because there in no interest of A.
How nice you!❤
don't add background music
It was added in earlier videos now its not being added.
Indiaan contract act 1872 section 68 ke tehat B naamak ka right bantha hain kyu A namak ka necessity for living in house ko bachaya hain usne
Very Good
Sir apne last question ka answer nahi btaya ....mere hisab se bo entitle nahi hoga bcz usme consideration to tha hi nahi nd jb consideration nahi to na contract hua aur na hi quasi-contract.
good keep it up.
Sir o lene ke liye intital hai o le sakta
Section 71
Yes A is entitled to take compunsation to b
It is a quasi contract
Sec 70 no proposal no acceptance
Non graticious act
very good keep it up
Very useful video, thanks❤❤ sir
Thank you so much
❤yes
Please nit add background music. Focus is important
Sorry for the disturbance, we have stooped it now.
@@LawGuruOfficial 😊
👍
Yes
Yes
Yes
👍👍👍
No
No
Because uska koi interest us proparty me nahi hai
Sec 69 no interest his property
Very good
Answer:- section 69 is applied
Very good.
Fudu
Sir please uplod remaining parts, school of jurisprudence.
Sir aap bhut ache se pdhate h well done sir 👍👍👍 mujhe ache se smj AA gya 🙏🙏
Thank you
A is not entitled as he has done that intentionally to get compensate.
very good
Thanks mere bhai 😊
Your welcome
Very nice 👌👍👌👍👌👍👌👍👍
yes becouse A is lose his life isme A ki jaan bhu ja sakti thi ya he should be damage by section 72
Very good keep it up.
Judicial remedies law of tort (link do)
What should be done with phone when the finder of lost phone sells it to another person with benefits of ruppes 50000 and then the phone's true owner is found? In this circumstances who will keep the phone and who will keep the amount of 50000? According to law? Please answer me anyone
The owner will get the phone and the founder will have to return the amount to the person from whom he has taken.
@@LawGuruOfficial Thank you so much 💞🤗
@@pearbhixcreation7230 Your welcome
Contingent contract se liable hai
Very good.
Thank u sir ❤️🙏
Your welcome
Background music agr na ho toh vedio aur zada achi lgte
Thank you advice karne ke liye.
Act done on volunteer way so no compensation will be given
No because not request this person
Very good.
Sir ap BALLB k entrance exam k topics cover krte h??? Kyy
Bilkul cover karte hai
@@LawGuruOfficial okay sir
Sir please remove bg music🙏
We have removed now.
Excellent erudite lecture. 🎉
Thank you so much
Hnji sir A namk ਲੈ shak da hai compensation
Very good
Yes b can take compensation
Very good keep going.
If A's act is non-gratutious act then he must be entitled to get compensation under S-70 of ICA
Very good keep going
@@LawGuruOfficial thanks 😊
@@vinaypatidar1557 Your Welcome.
a straigul to save b 's property
very good
Yes because A ko joh bhi expenses hua hai uske property bachne me wo legally entitled(sec.69) hai compensation ke liye
Very good
Nice concept delivered 🎉
Thank you so much
Good job
Thank you
Sir injunction topic pa video baniya?🥺
Sure we will upload very soon
Very well and softely explained.
Stay blessed
Thank you so much
A is not entitled for compensation the act was gratious and since there was no mention of A occuring any expenses while saving property of B he can't ask any compensation
Very good keep it up.
Sir is topic me se kitne quetion ban sakte h plz btadijiye BALLB 1 sem ke liye
Ye to paper prepare karne wale par depend karta hai.
Ok sir
Thank you Sir
Your welcome
Yes, he can take compensation from B because according to seaction 70. he lawfully done something for B and B taked advantage from A act because his property is saved from the act of B. Important thing is that B done this act to take compensation for it's act. He don't done this act gratuitously. His intention is no gratuitously.
Very good keep going.
Question ka answer he ki
use mil na chahiye .
Because ki usaka intenstion to bachaneka hi tha na
Or usane bachaya to use mil na chahiye na usake effort keli ye .
Very good
@Sneha Lakhana Very good