In Brief
In this insolvency case, the Supreme Court clarified the scope of Section 14(1)(d) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which protects property from recovery during the moratorium period. The corporate debtor had entered into a joint development agreement with MHADA to redevelop property. When the corporate debtor became insolvent and a moratorium was declared, MHADA sought to terminate the agreement and recover possession. The Court held that the moratorium protects property actually occupied by the corporate debtor, interpreting 'occupied' to mean actual physical occupation and use—not merely legal or beneficial interests. The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the NCLAT's decision and directing the NCLT to reconsider the insolvency resolution application.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.