https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357751 The moratorium under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 did not prevent action taken under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 to address a sinking floating dry dock. Measures directed by the district disaster management authority were treated as special statutory action aimed at preventing environmental harm and public danger, and the Tribunal's jurisdiction was held barred by the disaster law's framework. Because the Disaster Management Act operated as a special enactment in response to a threatening disaster situation, the section 14 moratorium could not displace those public safety and environmental protection powers. The stay application was rejected. en-us Wed, 07 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Mar 2018 12:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357751 The moratorium under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 did not prevent action taken under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 to address a sinking floating dry dock. Measures directed by the district disaster management authority were treated as special statutory action aimed at preventing environmental harm and public danger, and the Tribunal's jurisdiction was held barred by the disaster law's framework. Because the Disaster Management Act operated as a special enactment in response to a threatening disaster situation, the section 14 moratorium could not displace those public safety and environmental protection powers. The stay application was rejected. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 07 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357751