India: Section 23 Of Indian Contract Act – Lawful Considerations And Objects

"No polluted hand shall touch the pure fountains of justice."1

Section 232 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 ("Act"), enumerates of three issues, i.e. consideration for the agreement, the object the agreement and the agreement per se. Section 23 creates a limitation on the freedom of a person in relation to entering into contracts and subjects the rights of such person to the overriding considerations of public policy and the others enunciated under it.3 Section 23 also finds its bearing in the other sections of the Act, namely section 264, 275, 286 and 307.

The word "object" used in section 23 connotes means "purpose" and does not purport a meaning in the same sense as "consideration". For this reason, even though the consideration of a contract may be lawful and real, that will not prevent the contract from being unlawful if the purpose (object) of the contract is illegal. Section 23 restricts the courts, since the section is not guided by the motive, to the object of the arrangement or transaction per se and not to the reasons which lead to the same.

'If the thing stipulated for is in itself contrary to law, the action by which the execution of the illegal act is stipulated must be held as intrinsically null: pactis privatorum juri publico non derogatur. 8

In a recent assignment9, our firm advised the client not to include any such terms in the document to be executed between the parties which would contravene any law in India. It was advised to the client that the if the contract is to be enforced by a party to the same, any enforcement in India of such contract or part thereof will not be possible in case the agreement or its object or the consideration involved therein is in violation of a statute in India. Further, that despite the inclusion of disclosures, indemnity, undertaking etc. in the contract and related transactional documents will not be of any advantage for the purpose of any action in India, in case the contract or any part thereof is in violation of any applicable statue, regulations, orders, bye-laws, guidelines etc. in India. In such case the contract will not be valid for the purposes of any action in India in light of the above discussed provision(s) of the Act since a party cannot consent to an agreement which is against the law. Moreover, the benefit of adding the said disclaimer, indemnity and undertaking in the contract will safeguard the interests of the foreign investee company (our client) only in the place whose law has been made applicable to the contract. However, in case any Indian law is violated such disclaimer, indemnity and undertaking will not be a ground for any defense, for any action in India, available to the party claiming a protection there under.

the above in perspective, it is pertinent to discuss the key elements of section 23 briefly; which are as under.

Forbidden By Law

The word "forbidden by law" is not synonymous with the word 'void' and hence it is not necessary that whatever is void is also "forbidden by law". 10 The above decision vas approved by the Supreme Court in Gherulal Parakh v. Mahadeodas (AIR 1959 SC 781) and the court held that:

"The word 'immoral' is very comprehensive word. Ordinarily it takes in every aspect of personal conduct deviating from the standard norms of life It may also be said that what is repugnant to good conscience is immoral. Its varying content depends upon time, place and the stage of civilization of a particular society. In short, no universal standard can be laid down and any law based on such fluid concept defeats its own purpose. The provisions of Section 23 of the Contract Act indicate the legislative intention to give it a restricted meaning. Its juxtaposition with an equally illusive concept, public policy, indicates that it is used in a restricted sense; otherwise there would be overlapping of the two concepts. In its wide sense what is immoral may be against public policy covers political, social and economic ground of objection. Decided cases and authoritative text-books writers, therefore, confined it, with every justification, only to sexual immorality. The other limitation imposed on the word by the statue, namely, "courts consider immoral" brings out the idea that it is also a branch of the common law like the doctrine of public policy, and, therefore, should be confined to the principles recognized and settled by Courts. Precedents confine the said concept only to sexual immorality and no case has been brought to our notice where it has been applied to any head other than sexual immorality. In the circumstances, we cannot involve a new head so as to bring in wagers within its fold."

The word "law" in section 23(1) means judicial law, that is, the law enacted by government and it is not permissible to a party to a contract to claim on the basis of a contract which is prohibited by a law. The question, whether a particular transaction is forbidden by an Act or tends to defeat its provisions is always one of construction of the Act, the rule for which is that it should be construed according to the intention of the persons passing it and such intention should be gathered from what they have said in the Act.

If Permitted It Would Defeat The Provisions Of Any Law

The words "if permitted, it would defeat the provisions of law" mentioned in section 23 ought to be understood as referring to performance of an agreement which necessarily entails the transgression of the provisions of any law. The general rule of law as followed by the courts is based on exception to the maxim modus et conventio vincunt legem11. Meaning thereby, in case the express provision(s) of any law is violated by a contract, the interests of the parties or of third parties, would be injuriously affected by its fulfillment. The parties to a contract are permitted to regulate their rights and liabilities themselves, and the court will only give effect to the intention of the parties as expressed in the contract in accordance with the applicable laws of the land.

In short three principles arise from the section12 :

  1. an agreement or contract is void, if its purpose is the commission of an illegal act;
  2. an agreement or contract is void, if it is expressly or impliedly prohibited by any law;
  3. an agreement or contract is void, if its performance is not possible without disobedience of any law.

As per section 23, the difference between agreements that are void and agreements those are illegal is very thin or small. According to Anson13, "The law may either forbid an agreement to be made, or it may merely say that if it is made, the courts will not enforce it. In the former case, it is illegal, in the latter only void, but in as much as illegal contracts are also void, though void contracts are not necessarily, the distinction is for most purposes not important and even judges seem to treat the two as inter-changeable".

In Rajat Kumar Rath v. Government of India14 , the Orissa High Court has explained the distinction in the following words:

"... A void contract is one which has no legal effect. An illegal contract through resembling the void contract in that it also has no legal effect as between the immediate parties, has this further effect that even transactions collateral to it became tainted with illegality and we, therefore, in certain circumstances not enforceable. If an agreement is merely collateral to another or constitutes an aid facilitating the carrying out of the object of the other agreement which though void is not prohibited by law, it may be enforced as a collateral agreement. If on the other hand, it is part of a mechanism meant to carry out the law actually prohibited cannot countenance a claim on the agreement, it being tainted with the illegality of the object sought to be achieved which is hit by the law. Where a person entering into an illegal contract promises expressly or by implication that the contract is blameless, such a promise amounts to collateral agreement upon the other party if in fact innocent of turpitude may sue for damages".


'pari delicto est conditio defendentis' 15

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India under plethora of judgments has observed / held that there are several exceptions to the above rule. In this connection, the Hon'ble Supreme Court quoted with approval the following observations of Anson: 16

"... there are exceptional cases in which a man will be relieved of the consequences of an illegal contract into which he has entered, cases to which the maxim does not apply. They will fall into three classes: (a) where the illegal propose has yet been substantially carried into effect before it is sought to recover money paid or goods supplied or delivered in furtheranceof it; (b) where the plaintiff is not in pari delicto with the defendant; (c) where the plaintiff does not have to rely on the illegality to make out his claim".

Section 23 says that the consideration or object of the agreement is unlawful if it "is fraudulent".17 But subject to such and similar exceptions, contracts which are not illegal and do not originate in fraud, must in all respects be observed: pacta conventa quae neque contra leges neque dolo mall inita sunt omnimodo observanda sunt (contracts which are not illegal, and do not originate in fraud, must in all respects be observed).

Injury To Person Or Property Of Another

As per the provisions of section 23, an agreement which involves causing injury to a person or property of third party is void and cannot be enforced by court and therefore, no claim is sustainable for the breach of such an unlawful agreement.

Opposed To Public Policy

It is trite law that one who knowingly enters into a contract with improper object cannot enforce his rights in relation to such contract. Notably, the Act does not anywhere define the expressions "public policy" or "opposed to public policy" or "contrary to public policy". However, one may note that the term "public policy" could plainly mean issues concerning the public or public benefit and the interest of public at large. 'Public Policy' is ".... a vague unsatisfactory term calculated to lead to uncertainty and error when applied to the decision of legal rights; it is capable of being understood in different senses; it may and does in ordinary sense means political expediency or that which is best for common good of the community; and in that sense there may be every variety of opinion; according to education, habits, talents and dispositions of each person who is to decide whether an act is against public policy or not..." According to Lord Atkin18,

"... the doctrine does not extend only to harmful effects, it has to be applied to harmful tendencies. Here the ground is less safe and treacherous".

The above principle has been followed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Gherulal Parekh v. Mahadevdas Maiya19, wherein Hon'ble Justice Subba Rao, referring the observation of Lord Atkin observed: "... Public policy or the policy of the law is an illustrative concept. It has been described as an 'untrustworthy guide', 'variable quality', 'unruly horse', etc.; the primary duty of a court of law is to enforce a promise which the parties have made and to uphold the sanctity of contract which forms the basis of society but in certain cases, the court may relieve them of their duty of a rule founded on what is called the public policy. For want of better words. Lord Atkin describes that something done contrary to public policy is a harmful thing; but the doctrine is extended not only to harmful cases; but also to harmful tendencies.... it is governed by precedents. The principles have crystalised under different heads.... though the heads are not closed and though the oretically, it may be permissible to evolve a new head under exceptional circumstances of thechanging world, it is advisable in interest of stability of society not to make attempt to discover new heads in these days". In Kedar Nath Motani v. Prahlad Rai20 , the Hon'ble Court held that "the correct view in law .... is that what one has to see is whether the illegality goes so much to the root of the matter that the plaintiff cannot bring his action without relying upon the illegal transaction into which he had entered. If the illegality be trivial or venial..... and the plaintiff is not required to rest his case upon that illegality, then public policy demands that defendant should not be allowed to take advantage of the position. A strict view, of course, must be taken of the plaintiff's conduct, and should not be allowed to circumvent the illegality by restoring to some subterfuge or by misstating the facts. If, however, the matter is clear and the illegality is not required to be pleaded or proved as part of the cause of action and the plaintiff recanted before the illegal purpose was achieved, then, unless it be of such a gross nature as to outrage the conscience of the court, the plea of the defendant should not prevail."

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has dealt with certain cases under section 23 holding that some actions of entering into contract are void. In the matter titled "ONGC Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd."21 while interpreting the meaning of 'public policy' in this case, the Hon'ble Court observed that it has been repeatedly stated by various authorities that the expression 'public policy' does not admit of precise definition and may vary from generation to generation and from time to time. Hence, the concept 'public policy' is considered to be vague, susceptible to narrow or wider meaning depending upon the context in which it is used. Therefore, it was held that the term 'public policy' ought to be given a wider meaning. The Hon'ble Court placing reliance on "Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Limited and Anr. v. Brojo Nath Ganguly and Anr." [(1986) IILLJ 171 SC] held that what is good for the public or in public interest or what would be harmful or injurious to the public good or interest varies from time to time. However, an award, which is on the face of it, patently in violation of statutory provisions cannot be said to be in public interest. Such an award is likely to adversely affect the administration of justice. Hence, the award should be set aside if it is contrary to (i) fundamental policy of Indian Law; (ii) the interest of India; (iii) justice or morality; (iv) in addition, if it is patently illegal. The illegality must go to the root of the matter and if the illegality is of a trivial nature, it cannot be held that the award is against the public policy. An award can also be set aside if it is so unfair and unreasonable that it shocks the conscience of the court.


On the basis of above discussed, it can be easily understood that the ambit and scope of section 23 is vast and therefore the applicability of its provisions is subject to meticulous scrutiny by the court of the consideration and object of an agreement and the agreement itself. Therefore, in order to bring a case within the purview of section 23, it is necessary to show that the object of the agreement or consideration of the agreement or the agreement itself is unlawful.


1. Per Wilmot, C.J., in Collins v. Blantern, (1867) 1 Smith LC 369

2. Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 - What considerations and objects are lawful and what not The consideration or object of an agreement is lawful, unless- It is forbidden by law; or is of such a nature that, if permitted, it would defeat the provisions of any law; or is fraudulent; or involves or implies injury to the person or property of another; or the Court regards it as immoral, or opposed to public policy. In each of these cases, the consideration or object of an agreement said to be unlawful. Every agreement of which the object or consideration is unlawful is void.

3. In Re: K.L. Gauba (23.04.1954 - BOMHC) [AIR 1954 Bom 478]. Para 11 : "...The freedom of the citizen, as indeed the freedom of the lawyer, to enter into a contract is always subject to the overriding considerations of public policy as enunciated in S. 23 of the Indian Contract Act. That freedom is also subject to the other considerations set out in S. 23."

4. Agreement in restraint of marriage void

5. Agreement in restraint of trade void

6. Agreements in restraint of legal proceedings void

7. Agreements by way of wager void

8. Arg., 4 Cl. & F. 241; Broom's Legal Maxims, p. 541

9. Review of a Private Placement Memorandum to be issued by a US company to selected investors in India.

10. Mahadeodas and Ors. vs. Gherulal Parakh and Ors. (AIR 1958 Cal 703)

11. the form of agreement and the, convention of the parties overrule the law

12. Neminath v. Jamboorao, AIR 1966 Mys 154: (1965) 1 Mys LJ 442

13. Principles of the English Law of Contract, 22nd edn.

14. AIR 2000 Ori 32, 34-35

15. both parties are equally at fault

16. Principles of the English Law of Contract, 22nd Edition, p. 343.

17. Relevant Illustrations to Section 23: (e) A, B and C enter into an agreement for the division among them of gains acquired or to be acquired, by them by fraud. The agreement is void, as its object is unlawful. (g) A, being agent for a landed proprietor, agrees for money, without the knowledge of his principal, to obtain for B a lease of land belonging to his principal. The agreement between A and B is void, as it implies a fraud by concealment, by A, on his principal.

18. Fender v. St. John Milday, 1983 AC 1 (HC)

19. AIR 1959 SC 781

20. AIR 1960 SC 213

21. 2003 (2) RAJ 1 (SC)

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions