Explicit contracts are approved by the parties, the same interests being shared with the same consequences, although the conditions are expressly specified, while the law imposes obligations in the case of quasi-contract, taking into account the conduct of the parties, in order to avoid an unfair advantage for one party at the expense of another party. In principle, contracts are implicit or implied. The first comes into play through behaviour, words or negotiations between the parties. The statutory contract is not a real contract. It would be unfair to call it a treaty. It occurs when a law, regardless of an agreement, aims to achieve the objectives of justice. In Keener, there are different types of contracts. The qualified author says that:-[xv] He says that quasi-contracts essentially involve contracts by law denote the nature of the evidence by which the plaintiff can assert, but the obligation arises from the law. Although the defendant does not intend to assume an obligation, but the law will impose an obligation because it would avoid an undue benefit at the plaintiff`s expense.
Taking into account the example above, the person who ordered and paid for the pizza would have every right to claim payment from the person who actually received the pizza – the first person is the complainant, the second person is the defendant. Subscribe to this royalty review for more regulated articles on this subject Chapter V of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 deals with „specific relationships that are similar to those created by contract.” It contains the obligations that English law calls „quasi-contracts.” A person is required to compensate another person when the basis of that obligation is neither a contract between the parties nor an unlawful act of the person who is required to compensate. The basis of the commitment is that no one should have the unfair advantage at the expense of the other. If A is improperly enriched at B`s expense, A is required to compensate B. For example, A and B must jointly need 100 rupees C. A single pays the amount to C and B, unknowingly, 100 rupees are refunded to C.C is obliged to refund the amount to B. A quasi-contract is characterized by the absence of a contract or mutual agreement between the parties. Quasi-contracts are often confused with unspoken contracts. Implicit contracts are also not contracts per se, as they do not enter into a written agreement. In the latter case, the actions and words of the parties, even if there is no contract between the parties in accordance with the facts, boil down to mutual agreement on the disputed case. The difference between the two can be illustrated by an example.
This shows that one person cannot entertain unfair benefits at the expense of another person. These obligations are generally referred to as quasi-contractual obligations, for lack of a better designation or a better name. It would be better to explain that the quasi-contract is the contractual obligation, which is not due to the fact that the parties have approved it, but because the law does not allow one person to have an unfair advantage at the expense of another party.