Example: A, a father of one daughter promised to give a certain amount of money to B, a father of a minor boy and B agreed to marry his minor son with the daughter of A. Here, the agreement is non-conclusive, since it is contrary to public order. Which contracts are considered to be contrary to public policy? They should look at the general principles rather than looking at the individual terms of a contract. Read 3 min Another example of a contrary public order agreement would be an agreement to obtain a job or a government title from corrupt funds. Such a treaty would not be applicable. Such a contract is considered contrary to public order, because if it were allowed, it would increase corruption and render inefficient and unreliable public services. Example: A, a purohit was promised to Rs.50 considering getting a second woman for B. Subsequently, A brought an action against B in order to recover the aforementioned amount. It was found that such a promise would amount to an illegal conjugal mediation contract and that the agreement was not applicable.
As a result, the appeal was dismissed. Privy counsel in the case of Raja Venkata Subhadrayamma Guru v. Sree Pusapathi Venkapathi Raju[vi], said that the court cannot refuse to force such arrangements if the court sees that it is not made with a bonafide or reward object seems to be the subject of blackmail and maintained that Champerty and maintenance are not illegal in India. It is an agreement in which one or the other party or a third party receives a certain amount of money in return for the marriage. Such agreements, which oppose public order, have no effect. Agreements that infringe on marital obligations are contrary to public policy and are non-agreeable. However, some general agreements could be considered against public order, for example: the policy of the law is another name for public order. Public order can be difficult for many people to understand because it has no legal definition. What is considered public policy can change depending on people`s time and needs.
Many courts have a conservative view of public order because they believe that public order is determined by judicial decisions and laws, not by people`s opinions. In principle, it is presumed that a contract or act is contrary to public order if it results in a violation of the law, harms citizens or harms the state.