Supervening impossibility under tenancy law barred specific performance after statutory vesting and transfer restrictions took effect.

A contract for sale of thika tenancy-related interests became unenforceable when the West Bengal Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 1981 came into force during the pendency of the suit. The Act vested the superior landlord's interest in the State, prohibited transfer of thika tenancy interests, and rendered contrary transfers or agreements void, with overriding effect over inconsistent agreements and other law. In that statutory setting, performance of the agreement became both unlawful and impossible, attracting the doctrine of supervening impossibility under Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Specific performance was therefore unavailable and the agreement could not be enforced.

---

---

Issues: Whether the agreement for sale became unenforceable and incapable of specific performance after the enactment of the West Bengal Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 1981 during the pendency of the suit.

Analysis: The agreement was entered into when the earlier Thika tenancy regime was in force, but during the pendency of the suit the 1981 Act came into operation. Under the Act, the landlord's superior interest vested in the State, transfer of thika tenancy interests was prohibited, and any transfer or agreement made in contravention of those prohibitions was rendered void. The Act also contained an overriding clause giving its provisions effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent in any other law, custom, agreement, decree, or order. In that statutory setting, the contract could not be specifically enforced because performance had become impossible and unlawful by reason of the later enactment, attracting the principle embodied in Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

Conclusion: The agreement became void and unenforceable after the 1981 Act, and specific performance could not be granted.

---