The court also examined contracts that did not contain a force majeure clause and the tenant asked for frustration with the contract due to the impossibility of performance. In this context, the Tribunal referred to a decision of the Supreme Court in Raja Dhruv Dev Chand v. Raja Harmohinder Singh & Anr, in which the Supreme Court held that section 56 of the Contracts Act applies only to executable contracts and not to transfers or transfers concluded. The Tribunal therefore decided that section 56 of the Contracts Act could not be invoked to require the waiver, suspension or exemption of the payment of rent. In addition, a lease may require a party wishing to activate the force majeure provision to immediately inform the other party in writing of the occurrence of a force majeure event. Even after notification and regardless of the likelihood that a court will impose a force majeure provision, each party is required to make reasonable efforts to reduce the damages. As a general rule, in the case of a commercial lease, the provisions of this clause provide for a mechanism to either defer or suspend performance of an obligation under a lease agreement due to unforeseeable circumstances that are not controlled by a party. A force majeure clause provides ways to spread the risk among the parties involved in the commercial lease agreement. The economic devastation from the spread of the coronavirus has forced private parties and supporters to consult the fine print in order to make contracts “safe of the future.” The invisible hand of “force majeure” has a constant impact on contractual obligations.