- within Technology, Accounting and Audit and Employment and HR topic(s)
- with readers working within the Law Firm industries
Supreme Court through its judgment dated 27.07.2026 in the matter of Tejas J Shah & Amisha T Shah v. Mantri Technology Constellations Private Limited (Now Known as Buoyant Technology Constellations Private Limited)1 held that imposition of moratorium on a company under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) is not a ground to reject consumer complaints against the promoters/ directors of the company.
The Court observed that the moratorium under Section 14 of IBC was operational only against the company and not against the promoters/ directors of the company. Since there is no independent moratorium or no independent protection operating in favour of the promoters/ directors hence the provisions of Section 14 of IBC will not bar the continuation of a complaint against them. In addition to this the court also reiterated that the protective sweep of a moratorium must remain in the four walls as carved out by the statute as held in Saranga Anilkumar Aggarwal v. Bhavesh Dhirajlal Sheth & Ors.2, and the same ought not to be expanded in a manner that stultifies remedies envisaged under other statutes, unless expressly provided.
Footnotes
1 CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4289-4290 OF 2025
2 2025 INSC 314
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
