Issues Raised in this case (2020 SCC Online SC 292)-
- Whether the Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Act (MHDA Act, 1976) would be prevailing over the Bankruptcy & Insolvency Code?
It is held by the Honourable Supreme Court that on the plain terms of Section 238 of the Bankruptcy & Insolvency Code, 2016, the Code must prevail. The idea behind the moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC is to alleviate/remove corporate sickness and a statutory status quo is pronounced under the said provision, the moment a petition is admitted/filed under Section 7 of the Code, so that the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process
(CIRP) may proceed without any hindrance by any of the obstacles that would otherwise be caused and that are dealt with under Section 14 of IBC.
- Whether Section 14(1)(d) of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code will be applicable to a statutorily freeze ‘occupation’ that may have been handed over under a Joint Development Agreement?
The honourable Supreme Court has held that Section 14(1)(d) of the IBC, 2016, when it speaks about the recovery of property “occupied”, it does not refer to rights or interests created in property but only the actual physical occupation of the property.