Example 1: A, an owner, rented his house to B, a commercial sex worker, knowing that it would be used for immoral trade. The landlord can`t get the rent back. Here, the object is immoral, the rent payment agreement is invalid. If the purpose or consideration of an agreement is the execution of an act prohibited by law, the agreement is annulled. Acts or undertakings prohibited by law are punishable by law, as are those prohibited (explicitly or implicitly) by specific legislation of Parliament and state legislators. Thus, this legality of a contract is governed by section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, which clearly defines the conditions on which the purpose and consideration of an agreement is considered lawful. These conditions include: 1. If the law does not prohibit example 2: A agrees to leave his daughter as concubine b. The agreement is subject to nullity because it is immoral, although the rental cannot be punishable under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). A change of era always marks a change in social norms, especially when it comes to determining what is immoral and therefore illegal. Therefore, it is not possible for the law to generally limit the scope of immoral treaties. Immorality is a fluid concept that can only be determined by current standards and standards and recent judgments. But the consequence of an agreement that is immoral will always remain the same, illegal and unenforceable.
But with the change of time and social norms came a time when the courts no longer felt the need to limit the scope of immoral contracts to sexual immorality. In doing so, the Delhi Supreme Court issued a ruling that broadened the scope of immoral treaties by taking into account agreements that deprive the parties of interest. This is the case of the Union of India v.M/s NK Garg -Co., which found that the illegal possession of other people`s money for a very long time was totally immoral and contrary to public order. Prostitution in India is considered legal under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act of 1956, but the treatment of prostitutes has always been considered immoral and considered. This means that any type of agreement reached by a party with a prostitute to provide him with property to help him in his profession is considered illegal, as it is immoral and the price to be paid becomes irremediable. Pearce v. Brookes stated that the money obtained by selling an item to a prostitute on credit or the rent to be obtained by providing rental-purchase items intended to be supported in his profession could not be recovered because the agreement is immoral and therefore illegal. With the Interest Act of 1978 and taking into account the importance of morality in trade agreements, the Tribunal understood that the extent of immorality could no longer be limited to the case of immoral sexual contracts, but that it should also be extended to the interpretation of immorality in trade agreements. Illegal withholding of money and non-payment of interest over a long period of time have not been found to be justified by the judge in today`s world.