Impossibility of Performance.

Section 56 of Indian Contract Act lays down " A contract to do an act which after the contract is made, becomes impossible or by reason of some event which the promiser could not prevent becomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful" this is known as docrtine of fustration. In Satyabrata v/s Mugneeram 1954 SC 44,the Supreme Court has laid down guidelines for doctrine of furstration.  

Section 56 of Indian Contract Act lays down " A contract to do an act which after the contract is made, becomes impossible or by reason of some event which the promiser could not prevent becomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful" this is known as docrtine of fustration. In Satyabrata v/s Mugneeram 1954 SC 44,the Supreme Court has laid down guidelines for doctrine of furstration.  

Section 56 of Indian Contract Act lays down " A contract to do an act which after the contract is made, becomes impossible or by reason of some event which the promiser could not prevent becomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful" this is known as docrtine of fustration. In Satyabrata v/s Mugneeram 1954 SC 44,the Supreme Court has laid down guidelines for doctrine of furstration.  

Section 56 of Indian Contract Act lays down " A contract to do an act which after the contract is made, becomes impossible or by reason of some event which the promiser could not prevent becomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful" this is known as docrtine of fustration. In Satyabrata v/s Mugneeram 1954 SC 44,the Supreme Court has laid down guidelines for doctrine of furstration.  

If the contract is impossible in itself physically or legallythe agreement is void ab initio. In such a case consideration can not be said to be real, i.e., it is non-existent and hence the contract is void even if it be known or not known, this is based on maxim lex non cogit ad impossibilia (The law does not compel the impossible). thus where A agrees with B to discover treasure by magic, the agreement is void. this rule however , is subject to a compensation clause. A person who has promised to do something which he knew or with deligence might have known and which the promisee did not know to be impossible or unlawful, has to make compensation to such promise for the loss sustained by him through the non-performance of the promise.