ZELVU Education
← Programme and all study years

LL.B. — Three-Year Academic Support

Year 2

Semesters 3–4 (reference sequence)

Qualification: 3 years · 6 semesters · graduate-entry LL.B.. Current purchased LMS term: 12 months. This study section does not sell a new degree or alter an existing learner’s paid expiry.

What is available here: A year-specific reference study map and assignment, plus a shared original foundation workshop with worked reasoning and answered checks. The workshop is supplementary and may recur across related years. The live inventory below identifies existing LMS readings separately. This is not a claim that every textbook, video or semester subject has been completed or reviewed by the degree-awarding university.

Learning outcome and subject plan

Explain and apply jurisprudence and property law, then demonstrate progress through a referenced assignment and a corrected practice portfolio.

Reference semester 3

  • Jurisprudence
  • Property law
  • Administrative law
  • Family Law II

Reference semester 4

  • Civil procedure and limitation
  • Criminal procedure — BNSS and transitional context
  • Evidence — BSA and transitional context
  • Company and labour law

The duration describes the standard full-time qualification route, not the number of months purchased on ZELVU. University paper names, semester order, electives, admission rules and batch-specific regulations must be checked separately. The reference sequence is a ZELVU study arrangement, not a declaration that every university follows the Delhi syllabus or the same examination schedule.

Original foundation reading and worked example

Procedure workshop — build an issue and evidence matrix

Substantive rights, forum, procedure, evidence and remedy are separate questions. Start with the governing enactment and factual dates. A sound procedural note explains both the route sought and the information needed to choose it; it does not treat every dispute as the same type of case.

Practice situation

A fictional client says an institution cancelled a promised service without explanation. You have an application, a receipt, one notice and two incomplete emails. Prepare an academic research plan, not a definitive opinion on maintainability.

Worked reasoning

  1. Build a chronology using the actual dates shown in each document. Mark missing dates and distinguish an allegation from a document-supported fact.
  2. Identify the institution's character and the legal relationship. Ask which contract, statute or rule governs it before suggesting a forum.
  3. Create columns for legal issue, governing source, fact required, available evidence, missing evidence and possible remedy. Give each document an identifier.
  4. Read the procedural route and limitation provisions applicable to the chosen claim. Do not infer a limitation period or jurisdiction from a similar-sounding case.
  5. Prepare both sides: state the claimant's strongest argument and the institution's plausible response. Identify any hearing, alternative-remedy or evidentiary issue that needs verified research.

Five answered self-checks

Write your answer before opening the explanation.

1. Why make a chronology first?

Dates can determine the legal version, procedural sequence and time-limit issues.

2. Does a receipt prove every allegation?

No. It proves only the propositions its contents and authenticity support.

3. When should a forum be selected?

After identifying the governing law, parties, nature of the claim and jurisdictional facts.

4. What is a useful missing-evidence entry?

A precise document or fact needed to resolve a stated issue, not a vague request for everything.

5. What must be checked before citing a period of limitation?

The applicable provision, relevant dates, exceptions and current authorities.

Your year 2 assignment

Prepare a one-page chronology and a six-row issue–evidence matrix. Add a 300-word explanation of why one unanswered factual question prevents a confident procedural conclusion.

Apply the method to Jurisprudence and compare it with Property law. Submit a source list, one worked application, your first answer, a corrected answer and a short explanation of the correction. For Indian legal studies, keep the chosen topic, data and professional boundaries explicit.

Year-specific focus: Jurisprudence; Property law; Administrative law; Family Law II; Civil procedure and limitation; Criminal procedure — BNSS and transitional context; Evidence — BSA and transitional context; Company and labour law. Use your actual prescribed syllabus to choose the relevant paper. A completed foundation workshop alone does not complete these subjects.

Suggested study-session schedule

A repeatable self-study routine, not promised live classes: one session for reading and recall; one for explanation and a worked example; one for independent application; one for correction and cumulative review. Match your university’s semester calendar and available study time. No faculty date, live class or assessed laboratory has been invented.

How the study sessions work

Self-paced reading, tutor-guided explanation and independent practice. These are suggested learning sessions, not a published live faculty timetable. Teacher-led feedback is available only when separately confirmed for your programme.

  1. Read and recall: Read the selected unit, close the text, and state its main idea and two supporting reasons in your own words.
  2. Tutor-guided explanation: Ask Course Tutor to explain one specific difficulty and show a worked example. Check citations, calculations and legal/clinical statements against the primary source.
  3. Apply independently: Attempt a new problem, case analysis, code task or evidence-based essay before opening the model approach.
  4. Check and correct: Compare your result with the marking criteria. Keep the original answer, correction, reason for the error and one transfer question.
  5. Review and assess: Revisit the unit in the next study session and at the end of the study block. Combine short recall, application and a cumulative assignment.

Assessment and feedback

Use a short diagnostic, unit practice, a study-block assignment and a cumulative review. Each academic year page includes a worked foundation workshop and answered self-checks; internship sections instead explain institutional requirements. Course Tutor feedback is AI-generated and needs verification; no human marking service is implied.

Concept accuracy
30%
Reasoning and application
30%
Evidence, sources and method
20%
Clarity and professional presentation
10%
Correction and reflection
10%

This is ZELVU’s suggested self-assessment rubric, not the university’s official marking scheme. University examinations, laboratory or field assessment and credit awards remain institutional.

Available protected course reading

36 published reading records in this course; 7 explicitly assigned to this year view. A record count does not establish complete syllabus coverage. Unassigned and legacy resources remain shared course reading.

Assigned year 2 reading

14 shared / legacy reading records — not a complete year syllabus
Existing learner: open protected LMSInspect the programme trial

Source and scope check

The three-year LL.B. requires an eligible prior bachelor's degree. It is not a three-year law programme directly after Class 12. The listed sources support duration or reference structure, not endorsement of ZELVU’s material. Institutional paper order, assessment and academic credits remain separate.