Introduction

Discharge of contract by impossibility of performance. The section 56 of the Indian contract act 1872 deals with doctrine of frustration. Under this doctrine a promisor is relieved of any liability under a contract, in this case the contract will be deemed to be void.

Legal marme” less non – cogit ad impossibbilla. (law will not compel a man to do what he cannot possibly perform). Doctrine of frustration results in making a contract void and this means that a contract becomes void due to impossibility of performance of obligations by either of the parties because of unforeseen situations in the process of fulfilling the obligations.

The doctrine of frustration is applicable in 2 cases:

1. If the objective of the contract has become impossible.
2. An event has occurred making the performance of the contract to be impossible beyond the control of promisor.

Sec 56 of Indian contract act, 1872

56. Agreement to do impossible act — An agreement to do an act impossible in itself is void.

Contract to do an 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.

Compensation for loss through non-performance of act known to be impossible or unlawful.— Where one person has promised to do something which he knew, or, with reasonable diligence, might have known, and which the promise did not know, to be impossible or unlawful, such promisor must make compensation to such promise for any loss which such promise sustains through the nonperformance of the promise.

 Applicability of Doctrine of Frustration:                                                                                                                              (1) there should exists a valid and subsisting contract between the parties                                                (2) there must be some part of contract which is yet to be performed                                                   (3) the contract after it is entered into becomes impossible of performance.

Causes in which Frustration of Contract can be Applicable:                                                                          (i) Death or incapacity of a party.                                                                                                                       (ii) Frustration by virtue of legislation.                                                                                                              (iii) Frustration due to change of circumstances.

     Literature review–  

AVATAR SINGH-

Frustration is an act outside the contract due to which the completion of a contract becomes impossible. After the parties have concluded a contract, events beyond their control may occur which frustrate the purpose of their agreement, or render it very difficult or impossible, or as even illegal, to perform. An example of this is where a hall, which has been booked for the performance pf a play, is destroyed by fire, after the contract has been concluded, but before the date of performance of the play.

The origin of the ‘Doctrine of Frustration’ as many other laws has been from the roman laws. It was part of the roman contract law which extinguished obligations of innocent parties where the ‘thing is destroyed without the debtor ‘s act or default’, and the contract purpose has “ceased to be attainable”. It was applied in roman times, for instance, to save, from liability, a man who promised to deliver a slave by a certain day if the slave died before delivery.   

      VANDANA JAISWAL-

The doctrine of frustration in contract law was initially defined by two points, namely: (i) the doctrine was to be only permitted where it was raised as a defense to a primary assumption on which the agreement was reached; and (ii) the parties were entitled to insert provisions as a contingency measure to provide for the occurrence of the same.

    Scope of the study-

   the scope is this study is limited to understanding the doctrine of frustration. This is done with                                      the help of 2 cases. One Indian case and one foreign case have been taken into consideration    while studying this topic. The research paper is mainly based on basic knowledge about the   doctrine of frustration and sec. 56 of the Indian contract act,1872.

Research methodology-

this study is done using the doctrinal method of research. It is mainly based on secondary data. This data explains about the doctrine of frustration with the help of case laws. The application of sec.56 of the Indian contracts act, 1872 is given importance in this study. This data and information is from articles, websites, books, journals and from the Indian contracts act, bare act. Analytical study method was adopted in the process of research.

Objectives of the study-

1. To study the doctrine of frustration.
2. To understand the applicability sec.56 of Indian contracts act,1872.
3. To analyse the conditions for applicability of doctrine of frustration.
4. To examine the causes of doctrine of frustration.

 

Significance and benefits of study-

1. Basic understanding of the doctrine of frustration.
2. Analysing sec.56 of the Indian contract act.
3. Application of topic in various cases.
4. Understanding the impossible and unlawful acts.