In kores Mfg Co Ltd v. Kulok Mfg Ltd, the two employees of the sugar factory had agreed that neither of them would employ a person who had worked in the other person`s factory for the past five years in order to protect trade secrets and other confidential information. The court annulled this agreement, since the ban applied to all workers, regardless of their skills and positions. A contract for negotiating the terms of an agreement is not an “agreement of agreement”, either externally or substantively. If, despite their sincere efforts, the parties fail to reach a final agreement on the actual terms, the contract to be negotiated is deemed to be respected and the parties are exempted from their obligations. Non-recognition is not in itself a breach of contract. Misa, the court defined valuable consideration as “within the meaning of the law may consist of either a right, interest, indulgence, inconvenience, loss or liability given, suffered or assumed by the other.” Article 25 of the Act states that all agreements are cancelled without consideration, unless they fall into the following categories: preliminary agreements are concluded during the formation and assignment of a wide range of transactions and agreements. They are made up of many market players and, at best, tolerated by others. They have been at the origin of disputes. If an interim agreement is well formulated, it can offer considerable benefits to a recommended transaction. It is often used to focus on the early stages of negotiations.
These are commercial contracts in respect of which the manufacturer concludes an agreement with the consumer according to which he would only buy items from him for a specified period. However, if the manufacturer produces an excess quantity, he can sell it to anyone. “As long as the negative provision is nothing more than an ordinary incident or an accessory to the positive alliance, there is nothing offensive to Section 27. However, the court cannot approve the agreement, especially if the buyer intends to place or monopolize the goods so that it can resell at its own price or if it binds the seller for an inappropriate period.  This was released at Sheikh Kallu vs Ramsaran Bhagat. Section 30 of the Indian Contract Acts provides that the betting agreement is not valid. The term bet is to put something useful on the outcome of an uncertain future event to come, such as a horse race, or on the finding of the fact in relation to a past or present event. This is mentioned in section 24 of the Act. The gist of this claim is that if the consideration is illegal in whole or in part illegal or if the final proceeds of the agreement are illegal, the agreement is voided. . . .