An obligation created by law for reasons of justice and fairness.

The doctrine of quasi contract is based

upon the principle that a party must pay for a benefit he desired and received under circumstances that
render it inequitable for him to retain it without making compensation. For example, a car owner brings his
car in for brake repairs.

The mechanic fixes the brakes and in doing so he also fixes a separate part of the axle that has a direct
relationship to the car's ability to brake correctly. Although the axle repair was not specifically contracted
for, a quasi contract is implied for which the owner must pay the mechanic.

QUASI CONTRACT (OR QUASI-CONTRACT)

EXAMPLE
A school district and a roofing company enter into a contract in which the roofing company
agrees to install a roof on a school pursuant to an architect's instructions. The roofing
company installs the roof and allegedly performs additional work (of which the architect is
aware) outside the scope of the contract. The roofing company is allegedly paid for the
roof's installation, but not for the additional work. If the additional work is, indeed, outside
the scope of the contract, the roofing company has a quasi-contract cause of action and
may recover under a theory of quantum meruit.

Constructive or quasi contract.

The term ‘constructive or quasi contract is a misnomer, the cases grouped
under this type of contracts have little or affinity with contract. Such a
contract does not arise by virtue of any agreement, express or implied
between the parties but the law infers or recognizes a contract under certain
special circumstances. For example, obligation to finder of lost goods to
return them to the true owner or liability or person to whom money is paid
under mistake to repay it back cannot be said to arise out of a consent, but
these are very mush conversed under quasi contracts as per sections 71 and
72 respectively. The contract act has rightly named such contracts as “
certain relations resembling those created by contract”.

A quasi contract is based upon the equitable principle that a person shall not
be allowed to retain unjust benefit at the expense of another. Sections 68-72
of the contract act describe the cases which are to be deemed ‘quasi
contracts’”.

Now we come to- example, and A says to B, If you dig my garden next
Sunday, I will pay you Rs. 500.’ B makes no commitment, but says, I am
not sure that I shall be able to, but if I do, I shall be happy to take Rs. 500.
This arrangement is not bilateral. A has committed himself to pay Rs. 500 in
certain circumstances, but B has made no commitment at all. He is totally
free to decide whether he wants to dig A’s garden or not. If B does not turn
up on Sunday to dig the garden, A cannot do anything about is. If, however,
B reaches to A’s place on Sunday to do the work, it will amount to his
acceptance a contract will be formed where both parties will be bound by
their performance.

For example, suppose that vacationing physician Jane Doe is driving down the highway and finds Joey
Bloggs lying unconscious on the side of the road. Doe renders medical aid that saves Bloggs's life.
Although the injured, unconscious Bloggs did not solicit the medical aid and was not aware that the aid
had been rendered, he received a valuable benefit, and the requirements for a quasi contract were
fulfilled. In such a situation, the law will impose a quasi contract.

When one party knowingly receives something for nothing, the courts may impose a quasi
contract. For example, if UPS delivers a new television to Zoe that she did not order and she
keeps the television and does not attempt to return it to the company that mistakenly
shipped it to her, a judge could impose a quasi-contract to force her to pay for the
television. Zoe did not intend to purchase the TV, and the TV company did not intend to sell
her a TV, but since she chose to benefit from the TV at the company's expense, the court
requires her to reimburse the TV company to make the situation fair.