Explanation:

Here's how this one shakes out:

The Statement

"Wanted a two bedroom flat in the court area for immediate possession."

That's the ad. Now let’s look at the assumptions behind it.

The Assumptions (what’s being taken for granted)

- I. Flats are available in court area.

The advertiser *hopes* there are flats available, but doesn’t know for certain. Just wanting doesn’t make it so; it’s possible to advertise even if you *think* there might be options. So, not necessarily implicit.

- II. Some people will respond to the advertisement.

This one *is* implicit. No one places an ad expecting zero response. The action of advertising only makes sense if you assume people out there might reply.

- III. It is a practice to give such an advertisement.

This isn’t necessary for the ad. Even if it was *not* a common practice, someone could still do it.

The Options

- Option 1: None is implicit.

That doesn’t work—II *is* implicit.

- Option 2: Only I and II are implicit.

I is not really implicit. The advertiser’s belief is not certainty, just hope.

- Option 3: Only II is implicit.

This is the one.

The logic is simple. The act of advertising comes with the assumption that someone might respond.

- Option 4: None of these.

That’s just a catch-all. Doesn’t fit here.

---

- Only II is implicit; it's the only one that must be true for the ad to exist.

- I is not essential—just because you want something doesn't mean you believe it's available for sure.

- III is not required for the ad to make sense.

So yes, you nailed it. Option 3 is the answer.