A contract against public policy is considered void. In legal studies, a contract is deemed void when it fails to meet the essential criteria that make an agreement legally enforceable.
If a contract promotes activities that contravene established laws or societal norms, it undermines the legal framework's integrity. Public policy represents the collective interest and welfare of the public, and maintaining this balance is crucial for legal enforcement.
Therefore, any agreement that disrupts or negatively affects public policy holds no legal validity, automatically rendering it as void. This ensures that the legal system supports ethical, just, and fair dealings in society.
Match List-I with List-II\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{List-1} & \textbf{List-II} \\ \hline \text{(A) Hadley v. Baxendale} & \text{(1) Undue Influence} \\ \hline \text{(B) Henkel v. Pape} & \text{(II) Coercion} \\ \hline \text{(C) Manu Singh v. Umadat Pandey} & \text{(III) Quantum of Damages} \\ \hline \text{(D) Chikkam Amiraju v. Seshamma} & \text{(IV) Mistake} \\ \hline \end{array}\]
Offenses | Sections |
(A) Voyeurism | (1) Section 77 |
(B) Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman | (2) Section 79 |
(C) Stalking | (3) Section 75 |
(D) Sexual Harassment | (4) Section 78 |
(A) Conditions for a Hindu Marriage | (i) Section 13 |
(B) Registration of Hindu Marriage | (ii) Section 10 |
(C) Judicial Separation | (iii) Section 5 |
(D) Divorce | (iv) Section 8 |
I. Arbitration of excepted matters | 1. A. Ayyasamy v. A. Paramasivam, (2016) 10 SCC 386 |
II. Conditional Arbitration Clauses | 2. In re - Interplay between Arb Agreements and Stamp Act 2023 INSC 1066 |
III. Separability of Arbitration Agreement - Kompetenz Kompetenz | 3. Vulcan Insurance Co Ltd v. Maharaj Singh and Anr (1976) 1 SCC 943 |
IV. Arbitrability of fraud | 4. Mitra Guha Builders (India) Co v. ONGC (2020) 3 SCC 222 |