Law 2024 Paper II 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Explain

Q5

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each. Support your answer with relevant legal provisions and Judicial pronouncements : 10×5=50 (a) A "'Quasi-Contract' arises out of judicial principles and not out of contractual agreement between two parties." Explain. 10 (b) Every partner of a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) for the purposes of its business is its agent but not that of other partners. Analyse the extent of liability of LLP and its partners. 10 (c) 'The rights of an unpaid seller do not depend upon any agreement, express or implied, between the parties. They arise by implication of law.' Explain. 10 (d) Mutual rights and duties of the Principal and agent may be wholly provided for in their contract. Discuss the general duties of the agent with special reference to the duty of reasonable care and skill. 10 (e) What is the commercial significance of the Geographical Indications of Goods ? Explain the benefits that accrue to the registered proprietors and authorised users by registration of Geographical Indications of Goods. 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में दीजिए । अपना उत्तर सुसंगत विधिक प्रावधानों और न्यायिक निर्णयों से समर्थित कीजिए : 10×5=50 (a) "'संविदा-कल्प' न्यायिक सिद्धांतों से उद्भूत होती है और न कि दो पक्षकारों के मध्य संविदात्मक करार से ।" समझाइए । 10 (b) 'व्यापार के उद्देश्यों के लिए 'सीमित दायित्व भागीदारी' का प्रत्येक भागीदार इसका अभिकर्ता होता है परंतु दूसरे भागीदारों का नहीं ।' सीमित दायित्व भागीदारी और इसके भागीदारों के दायित्व के विस्तार-क्षेत्र का विश्लेषण कीजिए । 10 (c) 'असदत विक्रेता के अधिकार पक्षकारों के मध्य किसी अभिव्यक्त या विवक्षित करार पर निर्भर नहीं होते हैं । वह विधि की विवक्षा से उत्पन्न होते हैं ।' समझाइए । 10 (d) प्रमुख और अभिकर्ता के परस्पर अधिकार और कर्तव्य के लिए उपबंध उनके संविदा में पूर्णतः दिए जा सकें । अभिकर्ता के सामान्य कर्तव्यों का, युक्तियुक्त सावधानी एवं कौशल के विशेष संदर्भ में विवेचना कीजिए । 10 (e) सामानों (वस्तुओं) के भौगोलिक संकेतों (जी.आई.) का वाणिज्यिक महत्व क्या होता है ? सामानों के भौगोलिक संकेतों के पंजीकृत कराने से पंजीकृत मालिक और अधिकृत प्रयोक्ता के लिए उद्भूत लाभों को समझाइए । 10

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 Law questions

Directive word: Explain

This question asks you to explain. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'explain' demands conceptual clarity with legal reasoning across all five sub-parts. Allocate approximately 30 words per mark (150 words × 5 parts), spending roughly 3 minutes per part. Structure each answer as: identification of the legal principle (1-2 lines), statutory provision with section number (2-3 lines), judicial pronouncement (2 lines), and brief application/conclusion (1-2 lines). Prioritize precision over elaboration given the tight word limit.

Key points expected

  • (a) Quasi-contract: Section 68-72 of Indian Contract Act 1872; constructive contract imposed by law (implied-in-law vs implied-in-fact); reference to Moses v. Macferlan or State of West Bengal v. B.K. Mondal
  • (b) LLP: Section 26 of Limited Liability Partnership Act 2008; distinction between LLP and general partnership liability; partner as agent of LLP not co-partners; limited liability shield with exceptions for fraud/wrongful acts
  • (c) Unpaid seller: Sections 45-54 of Sale of Goods Act 1930; statutory rights (lien, stoppage in transit, resale) as independent of contract terms; automatic operation of law
  • (d) Agent's duties: Sections 211-214 of Indian Contract Act 1872; duty of reasonable care and skill (Section 211) with reference to Keppel v. Wheeler or Lucifero v. Castel
  • (e) GI: Sections 2(1)(e), 11-21 of Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act 1999; commercial significance (brand value, export premium, terroir protection); benefits to registered proprietors and authorized users

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Provision / section accuracy20%10Precise citation of all relevant statutory provisions: ICA 1872 (Ss. 68-72, 211-214), LLP Act 2008 (S. 26), Sale of Goods Act 1930 (Ss. 45-54), GI Act 1999 (Ss. 2(1)(e), 11-21); no conflation of similar sectionsCorrect identification of statutes but with minor errors in section numbers or conflation of analogous provisions (e.g., confusing Section 68 with Section 69)Vague references to 'Contract Act' or 'Sales Act' without sections; incorrect statute identification or complete omission of statutory basis
Case-law citation20%10Accurate citation of at least 3 landmark cases across parts: Moses v. Macferlan/State of W.B. v. B.K. Mondal for (a); Keppel v. Wheeler/Lucifero v. Castel for (d); Scotch Whisky Association or Darjeeling Tea cases for (e); with correct facts/ratioMention of 1-2 correct case names without facts or with confused ratios; generic references like 'Supreme Court held' without naming caseNo case law cited; invented case names; or completely misattributed decisions (e.g., citing contract cases for GI questions)
Doctrinal analysis20%10Clear doctrinal distinctions: quasi-contract as restitutionary remedy vs. contract; LLP's hybrid personality; unpaid seller's rights as statutory superstructure; agent's fiduciary duty; GI as collective IP with sui generis protectionBasic doctrinal understanding without depth; conflates quasi-contract with implied contract; treats LLP liability identically to company lawFundamental doctrinal confusion: treating quasi-contract as actual contract; stating partners personally liable in LLP; confusing seller's lien with pledge
Comparative / constitutional angle20%10For (a): English law influence (Lord Mansfield's equity); for (b): comparison with UK LLP Act 2000 or US LLC; for (e): TRIPS Agreement Article 22-24, Lisbon Agreement, or EU PDO/PGI framework; Article 19(1)(g) nexus for GI protectionBrief mention of foreign law without specificity; generic reference to 'international conventions' without naming TRIPS or LisbonNo comparative or constitutional perspective; or incorrect claims (e.g., stating GI protected under Patent Act)
Conclusion & application20%10Each sub-part concludes with precise application: quasi-contract prevents unjust enrichment; LLP balances flexibility with limited liability; unpaid seller rights protect commercial credit; agent's duty standard varies by expertise; GI registration enables collective marketing and legal enforcementGeneric conclusions without application to facts; repetitive restatement of provisions without synthesisNo conclusion in any sub-part; or conclusions contradict the analysis; incomplete answers due to poor time management

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →

More from Law 2024 Paper II