Exception 2: This exception relates to agreements that parties who engage in the courts refrain from entering into, but which, in the event of a dispute, refer them to the Court of Arbitration. This agreement is not cancelled. 1. The contract is cancelled under paragraph 56, paragraph 2. In this section, it is said that any ambiguous or ambiguous agreement whose meaning cannot be certain must be considered inconclusive. For example, if A enters into an agreement with B, where he says that a certain amount of wheat delivers to his place of business. In this section, it is stated that an agreement must be considered inconclusive, unless it is covered by the following exceptions:- This section states that any agreement that prevents any person from exercising his right to practice a profession or trade must be considered inconclusive. Commercial and commercial freedom is a fundamental constitutional right under Article 19, paragraph 1. b) If the parties are not aware of such acts:- There may be cases where, at the time of the contract, the parties do not know the reality of the contract, but learn, after a certain period of time, that the realization of such an act is impossible.
Soon, the parties will learn of the impossibility of the delivery, the agreement becomes obsolete. These agreements are covered by the S.20 provisions regarding Mistake. In most cases, these agreements deal with the absence of the purpose of the contract at the time the contract was concluded. As a result, the agreement is marred by errors as to the existence of the purpose of the contract. In the following example, the point is all the clearer. This relates to trade agreements in which the producer concludes with the consumer that he would only buy items from the consumer for a specified period of time. However, if the producer produces an excess, they can sell it to anyone. “As long as the negative provision is nothing more than an ordinary incident or a secondary condition of the positive alliance, there is almost nothing abominable in Section 27.
However, the court cannot accept the agreement, particularly if the purchasers intend to corner or monopolize the merchandise, so that it can resell it at its own price or if it binds the seller for an undue period.  This was released in Sheikh Kallu vs. Ramsaran Bhagat. Agreements that do not currently exist but are concluded are also legally undying, unless all points of the agreement are actually agreed. For example, if X agrees to purchase Y grapefruit at a market value price on Date C, the market value can be determined on Date C. However, an agreement for X to buy some kind of Y fruit at a price to be determined at one time or another would be both uncertain and complete in the future and therefore invalid. An act contract that becomes impossible after the contract is concluded or because of an event that the promisor could not prevent becomes invalid if the act becomes impossible or illegal.