n the case of Pellegrine & Co$.$ vs$.$ Martin Electronics Ltd$.,$ Pellegrine & Co$.$ entered into a contract with Martin Electronics to purchase a specialized machinery for their manufacturing operations. However, unforeseen circumstances arose, leading to the machinery's destruction in a fire before it could be delivered. Pellegrine & Co$.$ is now seeking to terminate the contract, citing the doctrine of frustration.

Analyze the concept of frustration in contract law and its potential application to the case above. How does the doctrine of frustration operate, and what conditions must be met for a contract to be frustrated?

Discuss the legal implications of frustration in this case. Would the destruction of the machinery due to a fire be considered a frustrating event? What factors would a court likely consider in determining whether the doctrine of frustration applies?

Engage in a thoughtful discussion by analyzing the case study in light of contract law principles, citing relevant legal precedents and scholarly sources to support your arguments.