The Illusory Promise Doctrine: A Shield or a Sword?

I firmly believe that the Illusory Promise Doctrine is a sword used by companies to take advantage of consumers. In the landmark case of S.L. Kapoor v. Laxmi Cement Ltd. (1987), the Supreme Court of India held that where a contract contains a term which is not capable of being specifically performed, it's considered illusory and unenforceable. However, I think this doctrine has been misused, making it a sword to defeat legitimate contractual obligations.

For instance, in B. E. Ship Management Pvt. Ltd. v. Ship Captain Harbhajan Singh (2013), the court held that the terms and conditions of the employment contract were illusory and therefore unenforceable. I strongly disagree with this ruling because it sets a bad precedent, allowing companies to exploit their employees. What's your take on this?