There are some rules or essential elements to be valid consideration and the consideration is must satisfy such rules or elements to be regarded as valid. The Nepal Contract Act, 2056 has also comprised several rules of consideration. Rules regarding to consideration or its essential elements are given below:

a.  Consideration must move at the desire of the offerer:

 The offeree must follow the desire or request of the offerer to do or not to do something. The work performed according to the desire of the third party or voluntarily rather than offerer does not constitute a valid consideration. Thus the work to form consideration must be in accordance with the desire or request of the Offerer not voluntarily or at the desire of other third person.

b.  Consideration need not be adequate:

 Although the consideration is necessary element but it is not necessary to be adequate. If it has some value in the some value in the eyes of law, it is enough and the contract is valid. Whether it is more or less does not affect the validity of contract.

c.   Consideration must not be illegal:

 The consideration of every agreement must be lawful or legal. No valid contract bears the unlawful consideration and if the illegal consideration consists in an agreement it can loose its validity or enforceability.

d.  The consideration must not be immoral or against the public policy:

 The consideration must not be contrary with the public policy and general social practices of the people at large. If it is against to the public policy and such social practices than it looses its way of remedy from the court of law.

e.  Consideration must be real not illusory:

 Although inadequate consideration is also sufficient to form a contract but it must be real and possible or not illusory. Example, A promise to put life in dead body for Rs. 10,00,000/- is illusory.

f.  Consideration must be valuable to some extent:

 In Thomas v. Thomas, court held that consideration means something which is of some value in the eye of law. It may be some benefit to the plaintiff or some detriment to the defendant.⁶

Inadequacy of consideration does not affect its validity but it has some value in the eyes of law. Therefore it has to contain some value. For example, where A agrees to sell his car worth Rs. 10,00,000/- only and his consent is free, the agreement is a valid contract.

g.  Parties are autonomous to determine the consideration:

 Parties of the contract are autonomous to fix the quantity of consideration. Such provision is incorporated under section 4 of the Nepal Contract Act, 2056.

h.  Consideration may be past, present or future:

 Forms of consideration based on the nature of contract and it may be past, present or future. These forms of consideration depend upon the nature of executed, partly executed of contract respectively.

Past consideration: Where the promisor had received the consideration before the date of promise, such consideration is called past consideration. It means promise for past services rendered. But past consideration is no consideration in English law. Example, 'A' has lost his purse and 'B' a finder, delivers it to him. 'A' in recognition this service, promises to pay 'B' a sum of money. That is past consideration.

Present consideration: Consideration which moves simultaneously with the promise, is called 'present consideration' or executes consideration. Example, where 'A' sells a book to 'B' and 'B' pays its price immediately, it is a case of executed contract.

Future consideration: When the consideration on both sides is to move at future date, it is called future consideration or executor consideration. Example, 'A' agrees to sell and 'B' to buy a quantity of goods at stated price. In other words 'A' has promised to sell and 'B' has promised to pay.

  i. Consideration may move from the promisee or any other person:

As long as there is consideration for a promise, it is immaterial who has furnished it. It may move from the promisee or from any other person. This means that even a stranger to the consideration can sue on a contract, provided he is a party to the contract. This is sometimes called as 'Doctrine of constructive consideration.