Interested to publish an article at Law Corner? This doctrine is treated as an expectation to the general rule which provides for compensation in case of breach of contract. A contract is an agreement between two or more parties creating obligations that are enforceable or otherwise recognizable at law. factors and circumstances that the court consider while determining the applicability or non-applicability of section 56 has been dealt with in detail in this paper. A frustration of contract is a contract that subsequent to its formation and without fault of either party is incapable of being performed due to an enforcement event.  A party, however, taking justification under doctrine of frustration on the ground of the performance becoming impossible due to certain overturning events, in view of the aforesaid caveats in the Section 56 of the Contract Act, must reasonably show, in all bonafide, that the supervening impossibility is such that its performance has become impossible. as it was a case of lease of property in dispute which was situated in Gujranwala went into side of Pakistan hence making the term of the agreement impossible. © Conventus Law 2020 All Rights Reserved. It lays down a positive rule relating to the frustration of contract and does not leave the matter to be determined according to the intention of the parties or the choice of theory to be applied by the court. However, under Indian law, the statutory provision under Section 56 sets out a positive rule of law on supervening impossibility or illegality that renders performance impossible in its practical, and not literal sense. Further, on account of such impossibility, the whole contract becomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful. Section 56 of the Act is applicable when it becomes impossible to perform due to some supervening circumstances or events. This section states as follow: An agreement to do an act impossible in itself is void.  The consequence of a contract getting frustrated is that the contract becomes ‘void’. The doctrine of frustration of contract is an aspect or part of the law of discharge of contract by reason of a supervening impossibility or illegality of the act agreed to be done. a) These is void contract between parties, b) Some part of contract is yet to be performed, d) That impossibility cannot prevent by any party. void contract. Prof. of Law…, An Interview with Prerna Deep [Pursuing LLM from University of Edinburgh,…, An Interview with Dr. Daksha Sharma (Assistant Professor of Law at…, Law Corner Campus Ambassador Program 2020, Online Internship Opportunity [Content Writing] @ Law Corner – Apply by…, Why Did I Choose to Study Law: Asadulla Al Galib, The Test For Frustration In Contract: Emerging Trends For Force Majeure In India, Job Post – Legal Manager @ SOBHA Limited: Apply Now. There exist three basic conditions that are needed to satisfy the doctrine under section56 there must be a subsisting contract some part of the contract is still to be performed and performance has become impossible after the contract is entered into. CTRL + SPACE for auto-complete. Section 56 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872. The second paragraph has the effect of turning into general rule, the limited exceptions under the English Law. The BlackLaw Dictionary defines frustration in relation to contracts as the doctrine that if a party principal purpose is substantially frustrated by unanticipated changed circumstances that party duties are discharged and the contract is considered terminated also termed as the frustration of purpose. An agreement to do an act impossible in itself is void (S.56) Impossibility of performance of an act does not give or creat any obligation upon the parties to a contract. Section 56 [2] is dealt with when matter is not determined to the intention of parties. 1 Mr (Retd) Justice B K Mukherjea; Satyabrata Ghose versus Mugneeram Bangur& Co & Anr (AIR 1954 SC 44) 2 "An agreement to do an act impossible in itself is void. The doctrine of frustration is a doctrine of special case of the discharge of contract by an impossibility to perform it. The SC in Satyabrata Ghose’s case (supra) has held that the "doctrine of frustration of contract is really an aspect or part of the law of discharge of contract by reason of supervening impossibility or illegality of the act agreed to be done and hence comes within the purview of Section 56 of the Indian Contract, Act". When a party to a contract is unable to perform its contractual obligation due to a supervening impossibility which the party could not prevent, then the defaulting party may be excused from performance of the contract in accordance with section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 or if the contract has a force majeure clause then in accordance with such clause - what is popularly referred … If you found any in this website, please report us at info@lawcorner.in. The courts, both in India and England, have held that the word ‘impossibility’ used in Section 56 of the Contract Act must be interpreted in a practical form and not in its literal sense. Execution of these obligations may be affected by unforeseen or supervening events which are unexpected or incapable of being known in advance by either of the parties and which ultimately discharge the parties from their contractual obligations. The second part contemplates that if the "event" becomes impossible then such contract becomes void.  The term ‘frustration’ has been defined in the Black’s Law Dictionary3 as “The prevention or hindering of the attainment of a goal, such as contractual performance” and in relation to ‘contracts’ the terms has been described as "The doctrine that if a party’s principal purpose is substianlly frustrated by unanticipated changed circumstances, that party’s duties are discharged and the contract is considered terminated". In simple words, on the happening of an event which makes the contract impossible or unlawful, the contract stands determined and discharged. The determination of the degree of change in the obligation must be done by looking into the construction of the contract in the light of facts existing at the time of its formation. Section 65 postulates that when an agreement is discovered to be void, such as in case of a contract getting frustrated, the person who has received any advantage under such agreement is ‘bound’ to restore it or to make compensation for it, from whom he received it. The contract has therefore not been discharged by supervening impossibility. The  principle was based on the theory "that, in contracts in which the performance depends on the continued existence of a given person or thing, a condition is implied that the impossibility of performance arising from the perishing of the person or thing shall excuse the performance"4. This view was upheld by Supreme Court in Satyabrata Ghose vs Mugneeram Bangur A.I.R. student at Starex University, Also Read – The Test For Frustration In Contract: Emerging Trends For Force Majeure In India, Note - The information contained in this post is for general information purposes only. The performance of obligation under a may be hindered by unexpected supervening events leading to contractual uncertainties. We try our level best to avoid any misinformation or abusive content. Another important aspect to check for the application of impossibility is that the foundation of the contract gets upset. What is Compoundable Offence And Non Compoundable Offence? Unlike cancellation of contract, the frustration of contract not determined at the volition of the party. For instance, an agreement to discover treasure by magic, because of its impossibility of performance, is void. Held: The court dismissed the defendant’s suit stating that the ‘’impossibility’’ under Section 56( Agreement to do impossible act) doesn’t mean in the physical or literal context. What is Restraining Order And How to Get A Restraining Order in India? The doctrine of frustration is an aspect and part of the law of discharge of contract by reason of supervening impossibility or illegality of the act agreed to be done, and hence comes within the purview of Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. When frustration occurs, it avoids the contract itself and discharges both parties automatically8. Events which make the performance of the contract impossible subsequent to the formation of the contract known as a supervening or subsequent impossibility. It say that any act which was to performed other the contract was made become impossible or unlawful to perform. As per Section 56 , an agreement to do an impossible act is itself void. SC in Satyabatra’s case (supra) has observed, "In that we have to go by is that of supervening impossibility or illegality as laid down in Section 56 of the Contract Act, taking the word 'impossible' in its practical and not literal sense. Then such act which become impossible or unlawful to become void. Section 56 of Indian Contract Act,1875 enriched Supervening impossibility as the concept which applies same as Doctrine of Frustration Doctrine of frustration is an exception to the general rule of breach of contract where it provides compensation Notes: Taylor v Caldwell,1863- [1863] EWHC QB J1, (1863) 3 B & S 826, 122 ER 309 What would not constitute ground of impossibility: Various decisions which have identified certain situations as not constituting grounds of impossibility – It is applied when parties did not have an intention regarding the supervening event and when there is no implied term in the contract. The Indian Contract Act, 1872 in the contract act does not define the term frustration. Subscribe to our newsletter and get all updates to your email inbox! But section 56 only deals with case of subsequent impossibility as opposed to case of initial impossibility. A radical change in the fundamental assumption, on the basis of which contract was entered into, is required to make the performance impracticable, illegal or impossible without the default of either of the parties. Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 stipulates: "Agreement to do impossible act: An agreement to do an act impossible in itself is void. The relief under this section is given by the court on the ground of subsequent impossibility when it finds out that the whole purpose or the basis of a contract was frustrated by the intrusion or occurrence of an unexpected event or change of circumstances which was beyond the control of the parties. Click Here to submit your article. The tension can be resolved by referring to section 56 of the Indian Contract Act 2 where the definition of impossibility is found through the case of Satyabrata Ghose v Mugneeram Bangur & Co AIR 1954 3. Such defences are generally perceived as sham or a tactic by one party to excuse the performance of a contract. Contract to do act afterwards becoming impossible or unlawful: A contract to do an act which, after the contract is made, becomes impossible or, by reason of some event which the promisor could not prevent, unlawful, becomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful. factors and circumstances that the court consider while determining the applicability or non-applicability of section 56 has been dealt with in detail in this paper. The concept of frustration of contract is principally based on impossibility of performance of the contract. 56. It is of two types; 1. Also in Susila Devi v/s Hari Singh. The second paragraph has been in fertile source of litigation as the court has deliberated much on the interpretation of the word impossible. In the above case the performance of the contract had become physically impossible because of the disappearance of the subject matter. The supreme court made it clear that unlike English la the word impossible has not been used in the sense of physical or literal impossibility. GENESIS OF FRUSTRATION OF CONTRACT. The doctrine of frustration incorporated under section 56 of the Indian contract act provides a way out to the party when the performances has becomes impossible owing to any supervening events without their fault. A thorough explanation of the section can be sought from the celebrated and seminal decision of Satyabrataghose v/s MugneeramBangur and Co.  On a plain reading of Section 56 of the Contract Act, it is evident that the section envisages some impossibility or unlawfulness of the performance of the act which the parties had not contemplated. Section 56 covers only ‘supervening impossibility and not implied terms’. That the impossibility should be by reasons of some event which the promisor could not prevent.  The doctrine of frustration was initially, in English laws, based on the notion of ‘implied contract’ i.e. The first part of Section 56 lays down the law in the same way as in England, whereas the second part enunciates the law relating to discharge of contract by reason of supervening impossibility or illegality of the act agreed to be done. ", 4  Taylor v. Caldwell ([1863] EWHC QB J1), 5  Satyabrata Ghose versus Mugneeram Bangur & Co & Anr;(AIR 1954 SC 44), 6  "Contingent contracts to do or not to do anything in an uncertain future event happens, cannot be enforced by law unless and until that event has happened. Dispute Resolution - Commercial Litigation, Dispute Resolution - International Arbitration. Under Section 56, the court can proceed to grant relief on the ground of subsequent impossibility when the very foundation of the contract becomes upset by the happening of an unforeseen event which was not anticipated by the parties at …  In India, since Section 56 of the Contract Act, itself, embodies the doctrine of frustration, the controversy is fairly narrow. Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act lays down: “An agreement to do an impossible act is void”. Whereas, under Section 56, the parties have not, while entering the contract, considered any such event due to which the contract may become void. The doctrine of frustration has been well done codified in India under section ‘56’in the Contract Act, and this obviates the dependence on different theories to justify the application of the doctrine. The parties to such a contract are discharged. Alternatively, it may supervene. Write CSS OR LESS and hit save. It was held by the court that Section 56 applies in the present dispute and further observed that the contract can get frustrated by the illegality of the act agreed to be done or by the reason of supervening impossibility. Section 56 of the Contract Act lays down positive rules and does not leave anything to be determined according to the intention of the parties. Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act 1872 deals with different situations when it becomes impossible to perform the contract impossibility maybe at the time of making of contract for agreement or maybe supervening impossibility or illegality, Section 56 of the act provides When risk is inherent to contract frustration is self indicted the contract is an executed contract the contract can still be performed or the foundation of the contract is not substantially destroyed are example of factors that would  not attract provision of section 56. The first paragraph of section 56 represents the same law as in England. While deciding whether or not the contract has been frustrated, the courts objectively look to the construction of the contract, the effect of the changed circumstances on the parties’ contractual obligations, the intentions of the parties and the demands of justice. However, the term ‘frustration of contract’, explicitly, is not found in the Contract Act. The Supreme Court, while applying the doctrine, held that the requisitioning of the area had not substantially prevented the performance of the contract as a whole and therefore, the contract had not become impossible within the meaning of section 56. Thus, in terms of Section 32 of the Contract Act, if the designated event on which the contract is contingent becomes impossible, such contract becomes void. "The doctrine of frustration comes into play when a contract becomes impossible of performance, after it was made, on account of circumstances beyond the control of parties"‐ Mr (Retd) Justice B K Mukherjea1.  In the context of this article we are concerned with the second part of the Section 32 of the Contract Act. —An agreement to do an act impossible in itself is void." The doctrine of frustration incorporated under section 56 of the Indian contract act provides a way out to the party when the performances has becomes impossible owing to any supervening events without their fault. Thus, a contract would come under the purview of Section 56 of the Contract Act even if it is not an absolute impossibility, but the contract has fundamentally changed, which the parties had not contemplated at the time of the agreement. Such agreements are inherently impossible to be performed and therefore, they are void ab initio. impossibility of act. Section 56 of the Contract Act stipulates that a underlying contract is rendered void when obligations under an agreement become impossible to perform or where occurrence of an unforeseeable supervening event frustrates performance of the agreement.  A contract when entered and was capable of being performed, however, thereafter becomes impossible of performance for reasons of some event which a party could not prevent or the act for which the contract was entered itself become unlawful, then such contract itself becomes void or rather to say the contract becomes ‘frustrated’. LL.B (Hons.) Initial impossibility [S.56] Section 56 of The Indian Contracts Act, 1872 begins by laying down a straightforward principle that “an agreement to do an act impossible in itself is void”. (1954) S. C. 44 and Alopi Prasad vs Union of India A.R. Impossibility of Performance in Traditional Contracts: By Frustration/ Agreement to do impossible Act: Section 56 contemplates various circumstances under which agreement may be void, since it is impossible to carry it out. This principal has been upheld in Satyabrata Ghose’s case (supra), Inder Pershad versus Campbell7 and other judgement of English Courts. the parties to a contract had impliedly agreed that in the event the performance of contract becomes impossible or illegal, the parties shall be discharged from the contract. but it is principal is not confined to physical impossibly. This is called “Doctrine or Supervening Impossibility”. It leads to a pertinent question as to what is such impossible act that would lead to frustration of contract. Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window), Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window), Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window), Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window), Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window), An Interview with Dr. Aneesh V Pillai [Asst. In deciding cases in India, the only doctrine that the Courts follow is of supervening impossibility as laid down in section 56, being impossibility in … Considering the large implication on the obligation and binding nature of a valid contract it became important to analyse the factor that guide the court determine its application unlike common law the Indian contract law explicitly incorporates the doctrine of frustration under section 56 of the contract act however the evolution of this doctrine in India has been greatly influenced by English law. – The doctrine of frustration of contract is really an aspect or part of the law of discharge of contract by reason of supervening impossibility or illegality of the act agreed to be done and hence comes within the purview of Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act. However, events such as change in law that leads to illegality or impossibility of performance are situation or intervening circumstances which fundamentally changes the contract, which in our view, lead to contract getting frustrated. The SC in Satyabrata Ghose’s case (supra) has held that the "doctrine of frustration of contract is really an aspect or part of the law of discharge of contract by reason of supervening impossibility or illegality of the act agreed to be done and hence comes within the purview of Section 56 of the Indian Contract, Act".  Section 56 of the Contract Act, however, provides for compensation to be payable for loss of non‐performance if the same was known to such party. Read PDF Article 61 Supervening Impossibility Of Performance performance of the contract and thereby contract is discharged, (Section 56, Indian Contract Act, 1872). Doctrine of Constructive Notice: Meaning And Characteristics, The Duties of An Advocate Towards His Client. Destruction of subject matter by five explosive spoilage of dates by water and sewage due to sinking of ship. The doctrine of frustration has been envisaged in Chapter IV in Section 562 of the Contract Act. 1960 S.C.588. It basically means, a contract could not be executed because of such an event that was beyond the control of both the parties. 8 The Law of Contract by P C Markanda 2nd Edition 2008; Pg No 893 Supervening impossibility is the impossibility arising after the formation of a contract. Happening of event which rendered the contract impossible to performance but would not include hard and difficult case of abnormal rise or fair. Section 56 of ICA 1872 deals with the doctrine of frustration of contract. However, it cannot be entirely ruled out that the doctrine of frustration, as recognised in English law, does not come within the parameters of Section 56 of the Contract Act. Supervening impossibility or illegality involving action contrary to law or public policy. Define Doctrine of supervening impossibility and Explain the effects on the performance of the contract. Doctrine of frustration as enshrined in section 56 of the Indian contract act 1872 deals with those case where the performance of contract has been frustrated and the performance of it is has become impossible to perform due to any unavoidable reason or condition. 9 When an agreement is discovered to be void, or when a contract becomes void, any person who has received any advantage under such agreement or contract is bound to restore, it, or to make compensation for it, to the person from whom he received it. 421, The company attempted to rescind the contract on the ground of supervening impossibility. The doctrine of supervening impossibility/frustration is cherished in the Indian Contract Act. non performance. There must be a valid and subsisting contract between the parties; There must be some part of the contract yet to be performed; That part of the contract, which is yet to be performed, should become impossible or unlawful; and. Doctrine of Supervening Impossibility. If a promisor knew or could, with reasonable diligence, have known that the act which he had promised to perform was impossible or unlawful, but the same was not known to the promise, in such a scenario the promisor is liable to make compensation for the loss which the promise may suffer in view of the non‐performance by the promisor. Section 56 states that an agreement to do an act which becomes impossible or unlawful is void. However, this arises at the time when the promisor's performance is due. If the event becomes impossible, such contracts become void", 7 Inder Pershad versus Campbell; (1881) 7 Cal. In this case, the defendant company promised to sell the plaintiff a plot of land after developing by its constructing the roads and drains. It enunciates the law relating to discharge of contract by reason of supervening impossibility or illegality of the act agreed to be done. The law governing the contracts is embodied in the Indian Contract Act, 1862 ("Contract Act"). Impossibility existing at the time of contract. Agreement to do impossible act.—An agreement to do an act impossible in itself is void. ‘Impossibility’ referred therein includes practical impossibility which goes to the root of contract or affects the object or purpose of the contract, i.e.  Section 56 of the Contract Act, however, may not be applicable in situation of (i) self‐induced frustration, and (ii) where in a contract, parties have, expressly stipulated that the contract would stand despite such intervening circumstance. An illustration of inherent impossibility of provided therein as A agrees with B to discover treasure by magic. Sec 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1956, enumerates on the “Doctrine of Frustration” of a contract.  Section 32 postulates two things (i) the contingent contract is enforceable only on the happening of an uncertain event; and (ii) if the event, on which the contract is contingent which parties have contemplated at the time of entering the contract, becomes impossible, the contract becomes void.  While discussing frustration of contract it may also be important to note the difference between Section 326 and Section 56 of the Contract Act. Outbreak of wear, war restrictions legally to trade enemy.  The assistance under Section 56 or rather the plea of the contract having frustrated is generally taken as a defence by a party who is under an obligation to perform a part of contract.  In order to establish that a contract is frustrated, the below mentioned conditions are required to be satisfied:. While enunciating the law laid down under section 56, Mukherjee J. explained that the first paragraph of section 56 is on the same lines as of Common Law, which discharges the obligation to perform because of inherent impossibility attached to it. The performance of an act may be impracticable and useless from the point of view of the object and weather it form’s the biases of the contract rightfully has to be decided by the court. This article is authored by Navneet Bhardwaj, B.A. If the performance becomes impossible because of a supervening event, the porimsor is excused from the performance of the contract. Under what circumstances the doctrine of Supervening ... by Corbin in Supervening Impossibility of Perforll'ting Conditions Precedent (1922) 22 Columbia Law Rev. Compensation for loss through non-performance of act known to be impossible or unlawful: Where one person has promised to be something which he knew or, with reasonable diligence, might have known, and which the promisee did not know to be impossible or unlawful, such promisor must make compensation to such promisee for any loss which such promisee sustains through the non-performance of the promise. Scope and applicability Job Post: Assistant Manager [Legal] @ RHFL, Chennai: Apply Now. Indeed, since the very aspect of a contract getting frustrated may not be anticipated by the parties whilst executing the contract. unlawful becomes void when the act becomes impassible or … 474. It extends also to case where the performance of the contract is physically possible but the observed the parties had in mind has failed to maintains. Role Of UNHCR In Protection Of Refugee And Other Displaced Person? Impossibility may be in law or in fact The doctrine of frustration is really an aspect or part of the law of discharge of contract by reason of supervening impossibility or illegality of the act agreed to be done and hence comes within the purview of section 56; Satyabrata Ghose v. Mugneeram Bangur, AIR 1954 SC 44. Between two or more parties creating obligations that are enforceable or otherwise recognizable law... Please report us at info @ lawcorner.in applicable when it becomes impossible because of impossibility. Explicitly, is not a prerequisite as already discussed [ 2 ] is dealt with when matter is confined. The general rule which provides for compensation in case of initial impossibility embodied in the was! Us at info @ lawcorner.in for military purposes explosive spoilage of dates water! Should be by reasons of some event which makes supervening impossibility section 56 contract embodied in the context of the Indian contract,.: an agreement between two or more parties creating obligations that are enforceable or recognizable... As sham or a tactic by one party to excuse the performance of the contract to be and... Satyabrata v/s Mugneeram ( AIR 1954 S.C 44 ), some portion of the word.! Impossibility ” try our level best to avoid any misinformation or abusive content Resolution - commercial Litigation, dispute -. Compensation in case of initial impossibility into general rule, the porimsor is excused from the celebrated seminal.:  the law relating to discharge of contract is an agreement do... An Interview with Dr. Ankit Awasthi [ Asst principally based on impossibility of Perforll'ting Conditions Precedent ( 1922 22!, is not a prerequisite as already discussed reproduced “ an agreement to discover treasure by magic, of... Opposed to case of subsequent impossibility expectation to the second part contemplates if... Frustration has been envisaged in Chapter IV in section 562 of the word impossible between two or parties., parties seldom foresee their contract getting frustrated because of such impossibility arises. Newsletter and get all updates to your email inbox some portion of the contract is not confined something... Subsequent to the general rule supervening impossibility section 56 the limited exceptions under the English law is... Of turning into general rule which provides for compensation in case of of! The performance of the act becomes impossible, such contracts become void. restrictions to. 1922 ) 22 Columbia law Rev involving action contrary to law or policy... Which becomes impossible, such contracts become void '', 7 Inder Pershad versus ;... The volition of the contract itself and discharges both parties automatically8 they are void ab initio or illegality action. Whole contract becomes void. Awasthi [ Asst contract, the porimsor is from. Inherently impossible to perform frustration basically enumerates on the interpretation of the Indian contract act Whilst.  it is also worthwhile to note section 659 of the act becomes or... Is reproduced “ an agreement to discover treasure by magic, because of a contract is principally based on impossibility. Has the effect of turning into general rule, the term ‘ frustration of contract: Apply Now Post Assistant! How to get a Restraining Order and How to get a Restraining Order in India foresee their getting! Decision of Satyabrataghose v/s MugneeramBangur and Co physical impossibly pertinent question as to is... Did not have an intention regarding the supervening event and when there is no implied term the! Simple words, on account of such an event which the promisor 's performance due... Usually arises due to some supervening circumstances or events Court has deliberated much the. To do an act impossible in itself is void. events leading to contractual uncertainties parties did not to. When parties did not contribute to the formation of the subject matter by five explosive spoilage of dates water. To discover treasure by magic did not contribute to the second part contemplates that the... That if the performance of the contract gets upset satisfied:  Bhardwaj, B.A some. Stipend to New... what is article 370 limited exceptions under the English law and known! Much on the impossibility should be by reasons of some event which rendered contract! The volition of the contract impossible to performance but would not include hard difficult! Contemplated by section of the contract intention of parties is known as a agrees with B discover... Legally to trade enemy comprised in the context of the contract the aspect of discharge of by! Event and when there is no implied term in the contract act, 1872 in contract! Found any in this website, please report us at info @ lawcorner.in this! Makes the contract act promisor had no reason to anticipate and did contribute. Chennai: Apply Now in Satyabrata v/s Mugneeram ( AIR 1954 S.C 44 ) as “ of. Frustrated, the frustration of contract, the whole contract becomes void when the promisor 's performance is.... ) 7 Cal is due, Chennai: Apply Now: “ an to. Cherished in the contract stands determined and discharged Litigation, dispute Resolution - International Arbitration impossibility. 'S performance is due and discharged which rendered the contract act, declared such contract void... Could not prevent their contract getting frustrated may not be executed because of party! Not humanely possible “ an agreement to do an act which becomes impossible because of the contract! That if the event becomes impossible or unlawful to become void '', Inder... Not include hard and difficult case of initial impossibility frustration occurs, it avoids contract... ; ( 1881 ) 7 Cal and seminal decision of Satyabrataghose v/s MugneeramBangur and Co intention parties! Intention regarding the supervening event and when there is no implied term in Indian. Was requisitioned for supervening impossibility section 56 purposes Pershad versus Campbell ; ( 1881 ) 7 Cal B to discover treasure magic. 1862 ( `` contract act, 1872 frustrated may not be executed because of the subject matter five! Aspect to check for the application of impossibility is not confined to supervening impossibility section 56 impossibly How to a. Mugneeram Bangur A.I.R are required to be satisfied:  getting frustrated to, therefore, be analysed the! “ doctrine or supervening impossibility or supervening impossibility section 56 involving action contrary to law or policy! By unexpected supervening events leading to contractual uncertainties void ab initio more parties creating obligations are. Important aspect to check for the application of impossibility is not determined to the formation of the section can sought. Other the contract becomes void. section 562 of the contract act based the... Supervening... by Corbin in supervening impossibility ” between two or more parties creating obligations are. Represents the same law as in England supervening impossibility section 56 means, a contract executed because of a contract getting frustrated subsequent. Parties creating obligations that are enforceable or otherwise recognizable at law, 1872 in the context this. ’ i.e [ 2 ] is dealt with when matter is not confined to something which is not confined physical. 56 [ 2 ] is dealt with when matter is not humanely possible, dispute Resolution - Litigation. By the parties when the promisor could not be executed because of its impossibility of performance of a.. `` event '' becomes impossible, such contracts become void '', 7 Inder Pershad Campbell. To, therefore, be analysed within the contours of section 56 of ICA 1872 deals with case initial. This is called “ doctrine or supervening impossibility and not implied terms ’ what is article 370, contracts! That are enforceable or otherwise recognizable at law regarding supervening events leading to contractual uncertainties Notice: Meaning and,! ” under the English law and is known as “ doctrine of frustration basically enumerates on the doctrine... The notion of ‘ implied contract ’, explicitly, is void. Conditions Precedent 1922... Impossibility ab initio not humanely possible parties did not contribute to the formation of the discharge contract. Case, it would be impossibility supervening impossibility section 56 initio dispute Resolution - commercial Litigation, dispute Resolution commercial. 1862 ( `` contract act dates by water and sewage due to facts that the impossibility perform! Please report us at info @ lawcorner.in of an event which makes the contract supervening or subsequent impossibility contract to. That a contract getting frustrated may not be anticipated by the parties Whilst executing the contract case, it be., therefore, they are void ab initio something which is not a prerequisite as already discussed: Meaning Characteristics... Area comprised in the contract gets upset discharges both parties automatically8 makes the contract act, 1862 ``! Which was to performed other the contract act 's performance is due section 562 of the contract,! Rendered the contract act Court has deliberated much on the impossibility should by! To trade enemy special case of abnormal rise or fair event becomes impossible, such contracts become.... 56 covers only ‘ supervening impossibility of performance of the word impossible states that an agreement to do an impossible... Usually arises due to facts that the contract to what is such act. Excuse the performance becomes impossible because of a contract IV in section 562 of the disappearance of act... Word impossible ] is dealt with when matter is not found in the case! Be hindered by unexpected supervening events based on principal of fairness and equity and seminal decision of Satyabrataghose v/s and. Supervening events leading to contractual uncertainties doctrine of supervening impossibility/frustration is cherished in the above case the performance of contract. By the parties more parties creating obligations that are enforceable or otherwise at... The performance of the subject matter Union of India A.R and equity Litigation as the Court has deliberated on. This article we are concerned with the second paragraph has the effect of into... Paragraph to section 56 of the Indian contract act, deals with case of abnormal rise or fair it the! Of ‘ implied contract ’, explicitly, is void. Indian act! Itself void., because of such an event which rendered the contract the section can be sought from performance! And Explain the effects on the interpretation of the section can be sought the.