Section 23 - What considerations and objects are lawful and what not : Indian Contract Act
What considerations and objects are lawful and what not? Section 23 of Indian Contract Act
Section 23 of Indian Contract Act 1872 : "What considerations
and objects are lawful and what not"
23. The consideration or object of an agreement
is lawful, unless-
it is forbidden by law1; 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
the Court regards it as immoral, or opposed to public policy.
In each of these cases, the consideration or object of an
agreement is said to be unlawful. Every agreement of which the
object or consideration is unlawful is void.
(a) A agrees to sell his house to B for 10,000 rupees. Here B's
promise to pay the sum of 10,000 rupees is the consideration for
A's promise to sell the house, and A's promise to sell the house
is the consideration for B's promise to pay the 10,000 rupees.
These are lawful considerations.
(b) A promises to pay B 1,000 rupees at the end of six
months, if C, who owes that sum to B, fails to pay it. B
promises to grant time to C accordingly. Here the promise of
each party is the consideration for the promise of the other
party and they are lawful considerations.
(c) A promises, for a certain sum paid to him by B, to make
good to B the value of his ship if it is wrecked on a certain
voyage. Here A's promise is the consideration for B's payment,
and B's payment is the consideration for A's promise and these
are lawful considerations.
(d) A promises to maintain B's child and B promises to pay A
1,000 rupees yearly for the purpose. Here the promise of each
party is the consideration for the promise of the other party.
They are lawful considerations.
(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.
(f) A promises to obtain for B an employment in the public
service, and B promises to pay 1,000 rupees to A. The agreement
is void, as the consideration for it 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
(h) A promises B to drop a prosecution which he has
instituted against B for robbery, and B promises to restore the
value of the things taken. The agreement is void, as its object
(i) A's estate is sold for arrears of revenue
under the provisions of an act of the Legislature,
by which the defaulter is prohibited from purchasing
the estate. B, upon an understanding with A, becomes
the purchaser, and agrees to convey the estate to A
upon receiving from him the price which B has paid.
The agreement is void, as it renders the
transaction, in effect, a purchase by the defaulter,
and would so defeat the object of the law.
(j) A, who is B's mukhtar, promises to exercise his
influence, as such, with B in favour of C, and C promises to pay
1,000 rupees to A. The agreement is void, because it is immoral.
(k) A agrees to let her daughter to hire to B for concubinage.
The agreement is void, because it is immoral, though the letting
may not be punishable under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).