From a perspective, the key elements of Section 23 should be briefly examined; Which are like underneath. Section 232 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (“Law”), lists three points, namely the consideration of the agreement, the purpose of the contract and the agreement itself. Section 23 imposes a restriction on a person`s liberty in the process of contracting and subjects that person`s rights to compelling public policy considerations and other considerations under it.3 Section 23 is also important in the other sections of the Act, sections 264, 275, 286 and 307. The concept of public order in the broadest sense implies a restriction on the freedom of people to do something in the wider interest or for the greats of the Community. under india`s Contracts Act, it limits the freedom of people to accept certain areas detrimental to public order. An agreement is illegal if the law de considers it to be contrary to public policy. Section 23 of the ICA 1872: What are the considerations and objects that are lawful and what is not.- The word “law” in section 23, paragraph 1, refers to judicial law, that is, the right promulgated by the government, and a contracting party is not allowed to claim on the basis of a contract prohibited by law. The question of whether a particular store is prohibited by a statute or tends to defeat its provisions is always one of the constructs of the law, the rule is that it should be interpreted according to the intent of passers-by and that intention should be collected from what they said in the law. Non-reproducible offences that fall within the jurisdiction of a matter of public interest should not be the subject of good private business and the management of criminal justice should not be entrusted to individuals by judges. If the offence is a public act, no agreement based on stifling prosecution in this regard can be valid.
The payment of $470 million by the Union Carbide Corporation to the Union of India was found to be non-burdensome for prosecutions and non-illegal payments; Union Carbide Corporation/ Union of India, AIR 1992 SC 248. Example 1: A B promises to drop an accusation he has made against B for theft, while B promises to resurrect the value of the items taken. The agreement is null and forth, because its purpose is illegal. The California Court of Appeals for the Third District refused to execute an agreement on the payment of debt notes used to acquire the organization of the drugs and similar products. Although the items sold were not in fact illegal, the court refused to comply with the agreement on public policy grounds. “… there are exceptional cases where a man is released from the consequences of an illegal contract in which he entered, cases for which the maxim does not apply. They can be divided into three categories: (a) if the illegal proposal is still in effect for the most part before trying to recover the money paid or provided or provided for extraction; (b) if the plaintiff is not with the defendant in Pari delicto; (c) if the applicant is not obliged to invoke illegality to assert his right.” In section 23 cases, it is necessary to examine or verify whether a convention on the ground of the objects is declared null or void.
The three points are, as mentioned above, viz.