Force Majeure - Indian Laws - General

Interpretation of Force Majeure in the context of legislative action - The words due to force majeure would include the period of time during which no lockdown may have been declared or during which human/economic activities may not have been specifically disrupted, by issuance of appropriate orders under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 etc. First, in the context of a legislative function, the writ Court sitting in judicial review may not look to test the subjective satisfaction of the legislative body or its delegate to see if the law made had the exact/measurable fact justification, for its enactment. The legislative wisdom must remain insulated from that judicial query. Under the Constitutional scheme of division of powers, Courts may never be enthusiastic and may remain disinclined to test the subjective satisfaction of legislatures in enacting laws. In fact, the Courts are neither equipped nor they are expected to undertake that exercise. (M/S GRAZIANO TRASMISSIONI- 2024 (6) TMI 233 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT ) DHANRAJAMAL GOBINDRAM VERSUS SHAMJI KALIDAS CO.- 1961 (2) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT McCardie J. in Lebeaupin v. Crispin ([1920] 2 K.B. 714), has given an account of what is meant by force majeure with reference to its history. The expression force majeure is not a mere French version of the Latin expression vis major . It is undoubtedly a term of wider import. Difficulties have arisen in the past as to what could legitimately be included in force majeure . Judges have agreed that strikes, breakdown of machinery, which, though normally not included in vis major are included in force majeure . An analysis of rulings on the subject into which it is not necessary in this case to go, shows that where reference is made to force majeure , the intention is to save the performing party from the consequences of anything over which he has no control. This is the widest meaning that can be given to force majeure , and even if this be the meaning, it is obvious that the condition about force majeure in the agreement was not vague. The use of the word usual makes all the difference, and the meaning of the condition may be made certain by evidence about a force majeure clause, which was in contemplation of parties. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED VERSUS HIREHALLI SOLAR POWER PROJECT LLP OTHERS- 2024 (8) TMI 1323 - SUPREME COURT 10.1 The law on force majeure, specifically in the context of PPAs, has been comprehensively dealt with by this Court in Energy Watchdog v. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission. The Court delved into contractual jurisprudence on force majeure clauses and frustration of contracts. It held that Sections 32 and 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 187219 govern the law on force majeure. When the contract contains an express or implied force majeure clause, it is governed under Chapter III of the Contract Act, specifically Section 32. In such cases, the doctrine of frustration in Section 56 does not apply and the court must interpret the force majeure clause contained in the contract20. It held that a force majeure clause must be narrowly construed.