Some agreements are unenforceable in court because they are contrary to public policy and the public interest. Such agreements are not illegal, they can still be concluded, but they are not enforceable in court. In other words, if one of the parties fails to meet its obligations in such an agreement, the aggrieved party cannot take the matter to a competent court to assert its rights. Commercial, marital and judicial procedures are examples of such agreements. 1Any agreement by which each party by which it is a party does not assert its rights in the context or in relation to a contract in the context of the usual court proceedings, or which limits the time within which it can thus assert its rights, is therefore null and void. Some agreements are only harmful to society. You are against public order. Some of these agreements are agreements limiting marital, commercial or judicial procedures. These agreements are expressly nullified in India`s Contracts Act in Sections 26, 27 and 28 respectively. An agreement in which the parties to the application commit themselves before rendering a judgment before the court of first instance in order to comply with the decree of that court and waive their right of appeal is valid and binding. The non-recourse agreement for which the indulgence granted by the respondents was a good consideration was not entirely limited to fully asserting a right to the title or contract. In this case, the Supreme Court held that the terms of an agreement should not be construed as preventing the other party from seeking an appeal against the appeal.
In this case, two similar contractors have agreed in partnership that only one of their plants will operate at the same time and that the profits be distributed among them. This deduction has been validated. The parties cannot delegate jurisdiction to a court they do not have, either through private agreements or through a jurisdiction they have under ordinary law. It was found that the principle that parties cannot delegate the jurisdiction of a jurisdiction or remove it from a jurisdiction is considered not an intrinsic jurisdictional issue in cases within the inherent jurisdiction of a court over the subject of the appeal and the question of territorial jurisdiction.