Navigating Prenuptial Agreements in India: Legal Insights for 2025
Family Dispute

Navigating Prenuptial Agreements in India: Legal Insights for 2025

Introduction

With evolving societal norms, increasing financial awareness, and rising divorce rates, Indian couples—especially millennials and Gen Z—are reconsidering how they approach marriage. Once regarded as an alien concept, prenuptial agreements are slowly gaining traction in India. These agreements provide a practical framework for financial clarity, asset protection, and emotional security before tying the knot.

Though Indian law does not formally recognize prenups as enforceable like in many Western jurisdictions, their importance is steadily rising. 

What is a Prenuptial Agreement?

A prenuptial agreement (or prenup) is a legally drafted document signed between two individuals before marriage. It outlines the division of assets, debts, financial responsibilities, and other obligations in the event of a divorce or separation.

Key Components:

  1. Property ownership

  2. Distribution of assets on divorce

  3. Maintenance/alimony obligations

  4. Debt responsibilities

  5. Clauses on child custody and inheritance (though Indian courts typically decide custody independently)

Legal Status of Prenuptial Agreements in India (2025 Update)

India currently lacks a codified law exclusively addressing prenuptial agreements. The enforceability of such contracts depends on several legal frameworks:

1. Indian Contract Act, 1872

Prenuptial agreements are treated as private contracts under this Act. However, under Section 23, a contract becomes void if it is opposed to public policy. Historically, courts have often refused to enforce prenups on this basis.

2. Religion-Specific Personal Laws

  • Hindu Law: Views marriage as a sacrament rather than a contract. Prenups are largely unenforceable.

  • Muslim Law: Recognizes marriage as a contract, making prenups more acceptable—especially for provisions like mehr, maintenance, and polygamy clauses.

  • Christian Law: Prenups may be considered for property settlement, although there’s no direct provision.

  • Special Marriage Act, 1954: Though it provides for secular marriages, it does not validate or govern prenups directly.

3. Goa Exception

Goa follows the Portuguese Civil Code, under which prenuptial agreements are legally recognized and enforceable, making Goa the only Indian state with clear statutory support for prenups.

4. Judicial Interpretations

  • Pran Mohan Das vs. Hari Mohan Das (Calcutta HC): Upheld a prenup relating to property.

  • Sunita Devendra Deshprabhu vs. Sitadevi Deshprabhu: Recognized terms of a premarital agreement during property division.

Why Indian Couples Should Consider a Prenup in 2025

Despite the ambiguous legal standing, prenups serve crucial purposes:

1. Clarity During Divorce

Prenups simplify divorce proceedings by providing clear asset division and avoiding expensive, drawn-out court battles.

2. Financial Transparency

They promote open discussions about finances, income, liabilities, and expectations, fostering trust.

3. Protection for Both Genders

Prenups ensure:

  1. Women’s rights to maintenance and shared assets

  2. Protection against dowry demands

  3. Security for men from false financial claims

4. Safeguarding Inherited or Family Wealth

Prenups can protect ancestral property or business interests that are expected to remain within the family.

5. Prevents Future Conflicts

By setting clear expectations, prenups reduce misunderstandings, especially in interfaith or cross-cultural marriages.

Common Myths and Facts About Prenuptial Agreements

 

Myth Reality
Only rich people need prenups Prenups are useful for all income groups to avoid disputes and ensure clarity.
Prenups favor only the wealthier spouse Courts invalidate one-sided, coercive agreements.
Signing a prenup signals distrust It promotes honest conversations and mutual respect.
Not enforceable, so no need to make one While not guaranteed, courts do consider fair and voluntary prenups.

 

How to Make a Legally Sound Prenuptial Agreement in India

To ensure that a prenuptial agreement stands a chance in court, couples should:

1. Ensure Voluntariness and Fairness

Both parties must willingly agree without pressure, coercion, or undue influence. Courts scrutinize these aspects carefully.

2. Verify Legal Capacity

Parties must be of sound mind and above 18 years of age.

3. Disclose All Assets and Liabilities

Full financial disclosure builds transparency and reduces the chance of future legal challenges.

4. Get the Agreement in Writing

Verbal prenups hold no legal value. Written agreements must be drafted clearly and signed by both parties.

5. Seek Independent Legal Advice

Each party should consult their own legal advisor to ensure fairness and avoid claims of duress.

6. Register the Agreement (Optional)

Though not mandatory, notarizing or registering the document adds credibility during disputes.

Prenuptial Agreements for NRIs and Cross-Border Marriages

NRI couples or those entering inter-country marriages must:

  1. Draft prenups in line with Indian laws if assets are located in India

  2. Align terms with the applicable foreign jurisdiction, especially in countries like the US, UK, or Canada where prenups are enforceable

  3. Consider dual jurisdiction clauses

The Future of Prenuptial Agreements in India

1. Rising Urban Acceptance

Metropolitan cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, and Hyderabad are seeing an increase in prenup inquiries and drafting.

2. Millennials and Gen Z Leading the Shift

With higher financial literacy, career aspirations, and delayed marriages, younger generations are viewing prenups as practical tools.

3. Judicial Willingness to Acknowledge Prenups

While there’s no binding precedent yet, courts are becoming more receptive to prenups when drafted equitably and transparently.

4. Demand for Legislative Reform

Legal experts are increasingly advocating for:

  1. A uniform law on marital contracts

  2. Statutory recognition of prenups under family law

  3. Pre-litigation mediation with prenups as admissible evidence

Sample Clauses in a Prenuptial Agreement

While the specifics vary, some commonly included clauses are:

  • Definition of Separate and Marital Property

  • Maintenance/Alimony Provisions

  • Debt Allocation

  • Ownership of Jointly Acquired Property

  • Life Insurance and Inheritance

  • Dispute Resolution Mechanism (Arbitration/Mediation)

Key Challenges and Legal Risks

1. Non-Enforceability under Public Policy

If deemed to undermine marriage as a sacrament or violate moral standards, prenups may be voided.

2. Overriding Statutory Rights

Clauses that waive spousal maintenance rights can be challenged.

3. One-Sided Terms

Heavily skewed prenups may be dismissed by courts as exploitative.

4. Poor Drafting or Lack of Legal Advice

Ambiguity in language or absence of professional help can render the document weak in legal scrutiny.

Conclusion: Embracing Prenuptial Agreements as Modern Safeguards

India stands at the cusp of modernizing its matrimonial laws. While full legal recognition of prenuptial agreements is still evolving, these agreements represent a step toward financial prudence, emotional clarity, and relationship transparency.

Whether you're entering marriage, advising a loved one, or protecting your financial interests, a prenuptial agreement—when drafted thoughtfully and fairly—can be a strong pillar of marital harmony and security.

Always consult a qualified family law professional to guide you through the process, ensure legality, and protect the rights of both partners in 2025 and beyond.

Disclaimer: This blog is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For personalized legal consultation, contact a licensed family law expert or divorce lawyer.

Non-Compete Clause in India  and its enforceability in India- In-depth Analysis - Legalkart
HR legal issues/HR related matters

Non-Compete Clause in India and its enforceability in India- In-depth Analysis - Legalkart

Introduction to Non-compete Clauses

Non-compete clauses are basically agreements where one party, often an employee, promises not to start a competing business or work for a competitor after leaving a job. In India, these clauses can be found in employment contracts, aiming to protect the employer's business interests. But here's the catch – the Indian Contract Act of 1872 doesn't favor restrictions on trade, profession, or business. In other words, if you're thinking of making a move that might clash with a non-compete clause you signed, the enforceability of such an agreement heavily depends on how reasonable and fair the clause is. Generally, Indian courts won't enforce a non-compete clause that lasts forever or covers a very wide geographical area. They look for a balance between protecting the business and not unfairly restricting someone's ability to earn a living. So, while non-compete clauses are common, whether they'll hold up in court is a whole other story.

 

Understanding Non-compete Clauses in Indian Law

Non-compete clauses, simply put, are agreements signed between an employer and an employee. The essence? Once you leave a job, there are certain things you can't do - like join a rival company or start a similar business for a specified period. But here's the twist: In India, the story of non-compete clauses is a bit complex. Indian law, drawing from the Indian Contract Act of 1872, leans towards favoring an individual's right to earn a livelihood over the business interests of the employer. This essentially means that while you can sign a non-compete clause, enforcing it after you're no longer with the company is, more often than not, a tough sell in Indian courts. They usually see it as a restraint on trade, which is a big no-no. There are exceptions, of course. During your time with the company? Absolutely, the non-compete holds strong. But once you wave goodbye? The situation changes. In essence, while non-compete clauses might look intimidating on paper, their enforceability in India post-employment is quite limited. Always a good idea, though, to get legal advice if you find yourself navigating these waters.

 

 

Section 27 of Indian Contract Act 

The Indian Contract Act 1872, specifically Section 27, generally considers agreements that restrain individuals from engaging in lawful professions, trades, or businesses as void to a certain extent. This provision effectively renders non-compete clauses unenforceable in India, as they are seen as being in restraint of trade and contrary to the Act. However, there are certain exceptions and circumstances under which a non-compete clause may be considered valid and enforceable.

One such exception is during the term of employment, where an employer may restrict an employee from engaging in activities that directly or indirectly compete with the employer's legitimate interests. This exception allows employers to protect their business interests while the employee is still under their employment.

Another exception applies to the period after the termination of employment. In this case, an employee may be restrained from using or disclosing the employer's trade secrets, confidential information, or proprietary data. However, for this restraint to be enforceable, it must be reasonable in terms of duration, scope, and geographical area, and it should not impose a question of livelihood on the employee. Courts apply the doctrine of "the rule of reasonableness" to determine the validity of such restrictions.

Non-compete clauses may also be considered valid and enforceable when they are part of a sale of goodwill or a partnership agreement. In these situations, the seller or the outgoing partner agrees not to carry on a similar business within a specified area and time to protect the buyer or the remaining partners from unfair competition.

 

Ultimately, the enforceability of non-compete clauses in India is determined on a case-by-case basis. Courts have the discretion to examine each case on its own merits and decide whether a non-compete clause is reasonable and necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the parties involved. This approach allows for a balanced consideration of the interests of both employers and employees while ensuring that agreements do not unduly restrict an individual's ability to pursue their profession or trade.

 

Factors Influencing the Enforceability of Non-compete Clauses

Non-compete clauses seem straightforward but their enforceability in India hinges on several critical factors. Firstly, reasonableness is key. A clause perceived as too broad in scope, duration, or geographical area will likely face resistance in court. It's about balance; protecting a business's interests without unfairly restricting an individual's ability to work. Secondly, the timing of the clause plays a role. Generally, clauses applied post-employment hold less water compared to those active during the employment period. The courts are keen to ensure that an individual’s right to earn a living is not unduly hampered. Lastly, the nature of the industry and the employee's role can influence outcomes. High stake roles with access to sensitive information may warrant a stricter clause. However, it all boils down to the clause's fairness and necessity. Remember, just because it's written in a contract doesn't mean it's set in stone. Courts will scrutinize these clauses to ensure they don't tip the scale too much in favor of one party over the other.

 

Legal Precedents on Non-compete Clauses in India

In India, the legal stance on non-compete clauses steers through a mix of historical precedents and the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Courts in India have consistently viewed non-compete clauses with a critical eye, especially when they extend beyond the term of employment. The cornerstone for this is the Indian Contract Act, which declares any agreement that restrains anyone from practicing a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind, as void. However, this is not a blanket rule. The Supreme Court and various High Courts have nuanced their judgments over the years. They have enforced non-compete clauses during the term of employment, accepting them as reasonable to protect the interests of the employer. Once the employment term ends, though, the courts typically rule against enforcing non-compete clauses, arguing they unfairly restrict an individual's right to earn a living and engage in trade. Simply put, if you're working for someone, they can stop you from competing against them during that time. Once you're out of their payroll, though, the game changes. Courts will likely side with you, should you decide to venture into the same field, provided you're not misusing confidential information gained during your previous employment. This delicate balance ensures both employers' interests are safeguarded while preserving employees' rights to move freely in the job market.

 

Exceptions to Non-compete Clauses in Employment Contracts

In India, while drafting employment contracts, including a non-compete clause is common. However, there are exceptions to their enforceability post-employment, as the courts here often see them as restrictions on an individual's right to earn a living. 

 

First, if a non-compete clause is vague, overly broad, or extends for a long time, it's likely not enforceable. The courts prefer clear terms that are reasonable in scope and duration. 

 

Second, non-compete clauses that solely aim to prevent competition, without protecting legitimate business interests like trade secrets or confidential information, typically won't hold up. 

 

Lastly, if the clause causes undue hardship to the employee or seems unjustly harsh, it's probably not enforceable. It's all about balance - protecting business interests without unfairly restricting someone's career opportunities.

 

Post-employment Non-compete Clauses: Can They Stand in Court?

In India, the enforceability of post-employment non-compete clauses often walks a tightrope. The key lies in the Indian Contract Act, 1872, specifically Section 27, which essentially states that any agreement that restrains a person from exercising a lawful profession, trade, or business is void. This means, broadly speaking, that after you leave a job, your employer can't stop you from working in your field or joining a competitor, since such restrictions are seen as obstacles to your economic freedom and right to earn a living.

However, it's not all black and white. Courts in India have made exceptions under certain conditions. For one, if your employer can prove that the non-compete clause is reasonable and necessary to safeguard their business interests—like protecting trade secrets or confidential information—they might have a case. Still, these clauses must be carefully drafted to balance the employer's interests without unfairly restricting the employee's future job opportunities. They are usually scrutinized for their duration, geographical area, and scope of activities restricted.

Short story? While non-compete clauses post-employment are largely unenforceable in India, there are nuanced exceptions. The smart move for both employers and employees is to consult legal advice when drafting or agreeing to these terms to ensure they're fair, and do not unjustly hinder an individual's career prospects.

 

How Businesses Can Frame Effective Non-compete Clauses

To frame an effective non-compete clause, businesses in India must balance legal boundaries with clear, practical expectations. The key is to ensure the clause is fair, reasonable, and doesn't restrict an employee's right to earn a living post-employment excessively. Focus on specifics like duration and geographical scope, making them tight but justifiable. A typical duration that courts find acceptable ranges from 6 months to 2 years, depending on the industry and the employee’s role. Pinning down the geographical area to where your business directly competes will make the clause more enforceable. Also, clarify the activities you want to restrict, such as working with competitors, poaching clients, or utilizing trade secrets. Remember, a broad, undefined clause might seem strong but stands weaker in a legal challenge. It's worth consulting a legal expert to tailor the clause to your business needs while staying within the legal framework in India. This careful approach guards your interests without unfairly limiting former employees' future careers.

 

Legal Remedies for Breach of Non-compete Clauses

If you're tangled in a breach of a non-compete clause in India, you have a few legal paths to consider. First off, these clauses are generally enforceable during the term of employment. But, once you wave goodbye to your job, enforcing such clauses becomes a murky affair, especially if you're the one being restricted. Indian law leans towards freedom of trade and employment, making post-employment non-compete clauses tough to enforce. However, if you're an employer and your former employee jumps ship only to spill trade secrets or confidential info, you've got a solid case for legal action. In such scenarios, you can drag them to court seeking an injunction to stop them dead in their tracks or even ask for damages if your business took a hit. On the flip side, if you're the one wearing the employee hat and feel cornered by an unfair clause, don't sweat it. The law might be on your side, considering Indian courts frown upon anything that unduly shackles one's right to earn a living. So, whether you're seeking to enforce a non-compete clause or defend against one, consulting with a legal eagle familiar with employment law in India is your best bet. They can help navigate these choppy legal waters, ensuring you don't end up banging your head against a legal wall.

 

The Role of the Indian Judiciary in Interpreting Non-compete Clauses

In India, the judiciary plays a critical role in interpreting non-compete clauses. Essentially, these clauses are agreements between companies and employees preventing the latter from joining competitors or starting a similar business for a certain period after leaving the company. However, the Indian courts have a clear stance: they favor an individual's right to earn a living over contractual restrictions. According to the Indian Contract Act, 1872, any contract that restrains anyone from exercising a lawful profession, trade, or business is void to that extent.

But it's not all black and white. While outright banning someone from working might not fly, courts have been open to reasonable restrictions. What's "reasonable" depends on factors like the time period of the restriction, geographic limits, and the nature of the job. For instance, a nationwide ban for several years might be excessive, but a one-year restriction limited to a city could be justified if it protects the company's legitimate interests like trade secrets.

So, when it comes to enforcing non-compete clauses, the Indian judiciary is not about hampering employment opportunities. Rather, it's about balancing those rights with a company's need to protect its interests. The key takeaway? Any non-compete clause hoping to stand in an Indian court needs to be reasonable, fair, and justifiable—not an overreaching barrier to an individual’s career progress.

 

Conclusion: The Future of Non-compete Clauses in India

The future of non-compete clauses in India hangs in a delicate balance. With the rapid advancement of the Indian economy, the need to protect business interests and intellectual property has never been more pressing. Yet, courts in India are often cautious. They weigh the benefits of such clauses against the potential harm to an employee's right to earn a living. Generally, for a non-compete clause to stand a chance of being enforced, it must be reasonable. This means it shouldn't last too long after the employment ends, it should be limited to a specific geographical area, and it must not unfairly restrict an employee's career prospects. Businesses crafting these clauses must tread carefully, striking a balance between protecting their interests and not infringing on their employees' rights. As the landscape evolves, companies and workers alike must stay informed and adapt to ensure mutual growth and success.

 

Frequently Asked Questions about the Non-Compete Clause:

1. What is a non-compete clause?

A: A non-compete clause is a contractual provision that prohibits an employee from engaging in a similar business or working for a competitor for a specified period after the termination of their employment.

2. Are non-compete clauses legally enforceable in India?

A: Generally, non-compete clauses are not enforceable in India as per Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act 1872, which considers agreements in restraint of trade as void. However, there are certain exceptions where a non-compete clause may be enforceable.

 

3. What are the exceptions to the unenforceability of non-compete clauses in India?

A: The exceptions include: (a) restraints during the term of employment, (b) reasonable restrictions on using or disclosing trade secrets, confidential information, or proprietary data post-employment, (c) non-compete clauses as part of a sale of goodwill or partnership agreement.

 

4. How do courts determine the validity of a non-compete clause in India?

A: Courts apply the doctrine of "the rule of reasonableness" to determine the validity of a non-compete clause. They consider factors such as the duration, scope, and geographical area of the restriction, and whether it imposes a question of livelihood on the employee.

 

5. Can an employer restrict an employee from engaging in competitive activities during the term of employment?

A: Yes, an employer may restrict an employee from engaging in activities that directly or indirectly compete with the employer's legitimate interests during the term of employment.

 

6. Can an employer prevent an employee from using or disclosing confidential information after the termination of employment?


A: Yes, an employer may restrain an employee from using or disclosing trade secrets, confidential information, or proprietary data post-employment, provided that the restriction is reasonable in terms of duration, scope, and geographical area.

 

7. Are non-compete clauses enforceable in the context of a sale of goodwill or partnership agreement?
 

A: Non-compete clauses may be enforceable when they are part of a sale of goodwill or partnership agreement, where the seller or outgoing partner agrees not to carry on a similar business within a specified area and time to protect the buyer or remaining partners from unfair competition.

8. What factors do courts consider when assessing the reasonableness of a non-compete clause?
 

A: Courts consider factors such as the duration of the restriction, the geographical area covered, the nature of the restricted activities, the employer's legitimate business interests, and the impact on the employee's ability to earn a livelihood.

 

9. Can an employee challenge the validity of a non-compete clause in court?
 

A: Yes, an employee can challenge the validity of a non-compete clause in court. The court will examine the case on its own merits and decide whether the clause is reasonable and necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the parties involved.

10. What are the consequences of violating a non-compete clause in India?


A: If a non-compete clause is found to be valid and enforceable, violating it may result in legal consequences such as injunctions, damages, or specific performance. However, if the clause is deemed void under Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act 1872, it will not be enforceable, and the employee may not face any legal consequences for violating it.

Legal Remedies for Termination of Contracts
Agreement & Contract

Legal Remedies for Termination of Contracts

Contracts form the backbone of business transactions and agreements in our society. However, not all contracts proceed as planned, and sometimes termination becomes necessary. When this happens, understanding the legal remedies available is crucial. In this guide, we'll delve into the various legal remedies for terminating contracts, ensuring you're equipped with the knowledge to navigate such situations effectively.

  1. Understanding Contract Termination: Contracts are legally binding agreements between two or more parties. Termination occurs when one or both parties fail to fulfill their obligations as outlined in the contract. This failure can result from various reasons, such as a breach of contract, impossibility of performance, or mutual agreement.

  2. Breach of Contract: Breach of contract is one of the most common reasons for termination. It occurs when one party fails to perform their duties as specified in the contract. In such cases, the non-breaching party has several legal remedies available:

    a. Damages: The non-breaching party may seek monetary compensation for losses incurred as a result of the breach. Damages can be compensatory, covering actual losses, or punitive, intended to punish the breaching party.

    b. Specific Performance: In certain situations, monetary compensation may not suffice to remedy the breach. In such cases, the non-breaching party may seek specific performance, wherein the court orders the breaching party to fulfill their contractual obligations as originally agreed.

    c. Rescission: Rescission involves canceling the contract altogether and returning both parties to their pre-contractual positions. This remedy is typically sought when the breach is significant and renders the contract unenforceable.

  3. Impossibility of Performance: Sometimes, unforeseen circumstances arise that make it impossible for one or both parties to fulfill their contractual obligations. In such cases, the affected party may seek termination of the contract through legal remedies such as:

    a. Force Majeure Clause: Many contracts include a force majeure clause, which excuses parties from performance in the event of unforeseeable circumstances beyond their control, such as natural disasters, war, or government actions.

    b. Frustration of Purpose: Frustration of purpose occurs when an unforeseen event undermines the fundamental purpose of the contract, making it impossible to fulfill. In such cases, the contract may be terminated, and parties may seek restitution for any losses incurred.

    c. Impracticability: If performance becomes excessively burdensome or costly due to unforeseen circumstances, a party may seek termination based on impracticability. However, this remedy is typically only available if the circumstances were truly unforeseeable and not the result of negligence or bad faith.

  4. Mutual Agreement: In some cases, both parties may agree to terminate the contract voluntarily. This could be due to changed circumstances, a shift in business priorities, or simply a desire to part ways amicably. When parties mutually agree to terminate a contract, they may do so through:

    a. Mutual Rescission: Both parties agree to cancel the contract and release each other from any further obligations.

    b. Novation: In novation, the original contract is replaced with a new agreement, often involving different terms or parties.

    c. Accord and Satisfaction: Parties may reach a new agreement to settle any disputes arising from the termination of the original contract, providing mutual satisfaction and resolution.

  5. Legal Considerations: When seeking to terminate a contract, it's essential to consider the legal implications and potential consequences. Key considerations include:

    a. Contractual Terms: Review the terms of the contract carefully, including any termination clauses, notice requirements, and dispute resolution mechanisms.

    b. Legal Requirements: Ensure that any actions taken to terminate the contract comply with applicable laws and regulations, including contract law, statutory requirements, and industry-specific regulations.

    c. Documentation: Keep thorough records of all communications, agreements, and actions related to the termination process to protect your interests and minimize the risk of future disputes.

Conclusion:


Terminating a contract can be a complex and challenging process, but understanding the legal remedies available is essential for navigating such situations effectively. Whether dealing with a breach of contract, impossibility of performance, or mutual agreement, knowing your rights and obligations can help you protect your interests and achieve a fair resolution. By leveraging the legal remedies discussed in this guide, you can approach contract termination with confidence and clarity, ensuring a smoother transition and minimizing potential risks and liabilities.

What Is A Non-Compete Clause In An Employment Contract?
Agreement & Contract

What Is A Non-Compete Clause In An Employment Contract?

A non-compete clause is a provision in an employment contract whereby the employee agrees to the fact that he would not enter into any competition with the employer during the term of his employment or even after the employment period is over. Typically, a fixed period of time is agreed upon for restrictions that extend beyond the term of employment. Non-compete clauses are common in IT Departments, Media, Financial Industry, Corporate World.
 

Enforceability of Non-Compete Clauses

The non-compete clause in an employment contract is governed by certain provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Section 27, of the Contracts Act, makes agreements that are in restraint of trade void. 

 

A vast number of judicial decisions have emerged on the question of enforceability of non-compete clauses. These decisions are divergent, and hence, no clear answer to the enforceability of non-competes has emerged till now. We have discussed some of these case laws below: 

  1. In Superintendence Company of India (P) Ltd. v. Sh. Krishan Murgai, a question was raised as to whether a non-compete clause in an employment contract is valid. The court held that a contract, with the objective of restraining trade, was void.

  2. A similar case came up in Delhi High Court, wherein, the court observed that any law which restricts an employee from working after the termination of his job is in violation of the Indian Contract Act,

  3. In Arvinder Singh and Anr. v. Lal Pathlabs Pvt. Ltd. & Ors, the court observed that any agreement which restricts the person from carrying any professional activity is contrary to law. 


For fixed-term employment contracts, the restriction can be enforced under specific conditions. If an employee has resigned before the expiry of the term, then the restriction can be enforced for the rest. Non-competes may also be enforced against senior-level employees under certain conditions. If there is suspicion that a senior- level employee possesses proprietary information about the company, such an employee may be prohibited from joining a competing company by enforcing a non-compete clause.

Thus, a non-compete clause in an employment contract is not completely unenforceable and may be enforced in some circumstances. However, it should be drafted carefully and properly. 


Non-compete Clause v/s
Non Disclosure Agreement

 

A non-compete agreement is different from a non-disclosure agreement. In a non-compete clause, an employee promises to not enter into any kind of competition with the employer after leaving the job. Whereas a non-disclosure agreement restricts an employee from revealing any confidential information of his previous employer to the current employer or anyone else in the future. While the enforceability of non-compete clauses is still not a settled issue, non-disclosure agreements may be enforced under the law. 

 

Conclusion


In India, any clause which restricts an employee from practicing any professional activity through a contract or an agreement is considered void under the law. The topic of whether a non-compete clause is harsh and extreme and whether it includes consultant is a debatable topic that will continue. However, whether such a clause imposed on an employee is harsh or not depends upon the circumstances of the situation, and the final call can be taken by the courts.
 

Decoding a Fixed Term Employment Contract
Agreement & Contract

Decoding a Fixed Term Employment Contract

A fixed-term employment contract is a contract wherein a company or an organization hires a person for a specific period on a contractual basis. Generally, such a contract is of one year; however, it depends on the need and discretion of the company or organization. Under this contract, the payment is fixed prior and cannot be changed or altered before the expiry of the term. 


Fixed-term employees have a right to the same amount of wages and working conditions as permanent employees. At the expiry of the fixed-term employment contract, the employer needs not provide any notice. However, if the employee continues to work even after the expiry of the fixed-term employment contract, then there is an implied agreement between the employer and the employee. 


What elements must be included in a Fixed-term Employment Contract?

 

The only difference between a fixed-term contract and a permanent contract is the period of time. An employee hired on a fixed-term employment contract is hired for a fixed period of time and cannot be removed except on account of some misconduct. Some of the key elements that need to be included in an employment contract are-:

 

  1. Job Title and Job Description: This includes a brief but specific description of the work one is expected to do.

  2. Duration or term of employment: Duration or term of employment becomes very important in a fixed-term contract. This lays down the term for which the employee has been engaged. 

  3. Hours of work: This clause lays down the work timings of the employee. 

  4. Place of work: The place of work or the location where the employee is stationed is required to be mentioned. 

  5. Leave and holidays: Typically, leaves and holidays, legally mandated, should be provided to the employee.

  6. Wages: The amount of wages, the mode of payment, etc., should be included in the contract. 

  7. Termination: Provisions that entitle both the employer and the employee to terminate the contract should be included in the contract. Termination upon expiry of the contract should also be provided. 

  8. Renewal: A provision for the renewal of the contract based on mutual consent of the parties should also be included in the contract.

  9. Boilerplate Clauses: Standard clauses such as jurisdiction, waiver, severability, etc., should also be included in a fixed-term contract.

 
 

Advantages of Fixed-term Employment Contract  

 

  1. Although a person is hired for a specific period of time, he/she is entitled to equivalent benefits that a permanent employee enjoys, such as safe and secure working conditions, similar pay, or sometimes more considering the skills of the concerned person. 

  2. A person hired under a fixed-term contract may be made permanent depending upon their performance.

  3. It is affordable for the employer when he needs an employee for a short term. 

  4. It helps get more specialized resources. 

 

Disadvantages of Fixed-term Employment Contract

 

  1. There is no stability, as the employment contract is time-bound and once the contract expires, the employee loses his job. 

  2. Typically, benefits such as promotion, good professional growth etc. are not available to fixed-term employees. 

  3. It is not an assurance of permanent employment. 

  4. For an employer, it may be more beneficial to have a talented pool of permanent resources. This will save the efforts of looking for an employee, every time the contract expires.

 

Conclusion

A fixed-term employment contract should be drafted in such a way so as to avoid any liabilities after its expiration. There should be no words that convey that the contract will be automatically renewed or that a more permanent role would be given to the employee. It is advisable to engage a lawyer while drawing up such a contract.