No right is acceptable for a contract that requires the parties to harm a person`s person or property. Since such conditions are punishable by criminal penalties, the courts cannot enforce such contracts, so that they are, as a whole, null and void. An unde concluded agreement is null from initio, essentially it is zero since it is formed. On the other hand, a cancelled contract is a contract valid at the time of its creation, but which ends up being invalid due to circumstances that are not controlled by the parties involved. In finer terms, it can be said that an undeclared agreement is always invalid, but when we talk about the null treaty, it is applicable at the beginning, but then it is absent due to changes in government policy or for some other reason. keydifferences.com/difference-between-void-agreement-and-void-contract.html According to section 23, the difference between unendanced and illegal agreements is very small or small. According to Anson,13 “either the law can prohibit entering into an agreement, or it can only say that if it is made, the courts will not impose it. In the first case it is illegal, in the second it is only inconclusive, but, in this case, illegal contracts are also null and void, even if the unconsconsed contracts are not necessarily important, the distinction is not important for most purposes, and even judges seem to treat them as interchangeable. “The Agreement was defined as follows in Section 2(e) of the Indian Contract Act of 1872: `Any promise and series of promises which constitute the mutual quid pro quo are an agreement; In other words, agreement = promise + consideration. But the agreement is different from a contract. Article 23 of the Indian Treaty focuses mainly on the subject-matter, i.e.
the object of the conclusion of the contract. It finds that where such an object is unlawful and contrary to public policy, the treaty itself is illegal and void and has no legal enforceability. These types of contracts do not create valid obligations on the part of the parties to the performance of these contracts and bind them to criminal liability if the act committed in place of the counterparty is unlawful. The illegality of a contract depends on (1) the law of the contracting country and (2) the law of the place of performance. Different rules apply depending on the legislation of the country(ies). (b) A contract concluded between the parties for the sale of the horse and both parties, by mistake, that the horse is alive, while the horse is dead at the time of the conclusion of the contract. . . .