eCourtsIndia
IndiaCode Laws
Section101
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

Moratorium

In force Act 31 of 2016 As on 15 Oct 2026

Act 31 of 2016 Ministry Corporate Affairs Enacted 28 May 2016 Instruments 12

Section 101 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 deals with moratorium. When the application is admitted under section 100, a moratorium shall commence in relation to all the debts and shall cease to have effect at the end of the period of one hundred and eighty days beginning with the date of admission of the application or on the date the Adjudicating Authority passes The Act was enacted on 28 May 2016.

(1) When the application is admitted under section 100, a moratorium shall commence in relation to all the debts and shall cease to have effect at the end of the period of one hundred and eighty days beginning with the date of admission of the application or on the date the Adjudicating Authority passes an order on the repayment plan under section 114, whichever is earlier.

(2) During the moratorium period—

(a) any pending legal action or proceeding in respect of any debt shall be deemed to have been stayed;

(b) the creditors shall not initiate any legal action or legal proceedings in respect of any debt; and

(c) the debtor shall not transfer, alienate, encumber or dispose of any of his assets or his legal rights or beneficial interest therein;

(3) Where an order admitting the application under section 96 has been made in relation to a firm, the moratorium under sub-section (1) shall operate against all the partners of the firm.

(4) The provisions of this section shall not apply to such transactions as may be notified by the Central Government in consultation with any financial sector regulator.

Section 101, The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Act 31 of 2016).

Cross-references

Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.

This section refers to

  1. s. 96 Interim moratorium
  2. s. 100 Admission or rejection of application
  3. s. 114 Order of Adjudicating Authority on repayment plan

Related judgements & precedents

These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.

  1. Mahendra Kumar Rajpal vs Ministry of Corporate Affairs

    Supreme Court of India 21 May 2021 Binding (Supreme Court) Reportable

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    The Central Government, acting under Section 1(3) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, has the power to bring into force different provisions of the Code at different times for different categories of persons. The 2018 Amendment Act, by creating personal guarantors as a distinct category in Section 2(e) and mandating the NCLT as the adjudicating authority in Section 60, provided sufficient legislative guidance for the Central Government to selectively apply the Code to personal guarantors to corporate debtors. The notification dated 15.11.2019 is a valid exercise of conditional legislation, not an instance of excessive delegation or impermissible legislative exercise. Personal guarantors, though individuals, are intrinsically connected to corporate debtors and warrant unified adjudication before the NCLT. The approval of a corporate resolution plan does not discharge the personal guarantor's liability, which remains enforceable as an independent contractual obligation under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

    On this section: Moratorium provisions; whether applicable to personal guarantors

    Read the full order on eCourts India

  2. Sanjay Singal vs Union of India

    Supreme Court of India 21 May 2021 Binding (SC) Reportable

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    The impugned notification dated 15.11.2019 bringing into force provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 only in so far as they relate to personal guarantors to corporate debtors is a valid exercise of power conferred by Section 1(3) of the Code. The Central Government acted within its constitutional powers in selectively applying Code provisions to personal guarantors as a distinct category of individuals, as this classification was created by Parliament through the 2018 Amendment Act which amended Section 2(e) and Section 60 to provide unified adjudication of corporate debtors and personal guarantors before the NCLT. The notification does not constitute impermissible delegation of legislative power or excessive modification of statutory provisions, but rather operationalizes the Parliamentary intent to treat personal guarantors differently from other individuals due to their intrinsic connection with corporate debtors. Approval of a resolution plan relating to a corporate debtor does not operate to discharge the liabilities of personal guarantors to such corporate debtors, as the guarantor's liability is co-extensive with the principal debtor and continues notwithstanding involuntary discharge of the principal debtor by operation of law.

    On this section: Moratorium provisions applicable to personal guarantors in insolvency proceedings

    Read the full order on eCourts India

  3. Lalit Kumar Jain vs Union of India

    Supreme Court of India 21 May 2021 Binding (SC) Reportable

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    The Central Government, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 1(3) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, has authority to bring into force different provisions of the Code at different times for different categories of persons, including personal guarantors to corporate debtors. The 2018 Amendment Act, by creating distinct classification of personal guarantors under Section 2(e) and amending Section 60, provided sufficient parliamentary guidance for such selective application. The impugned notification, which brings into force provisions of Part III of the Code only in relation to personal guarantors to corporate debtors, is valid exercise of power conferred by Section 1(3) and does not amount to excessive delegation or modification of Code provisions. Furthermore, approval of a resolution plan for a corporate debtor does not discharge the personal guarantee liabilities of guarantors, as such liabilities arise from independent contracts of guarantee and are not discharged by involuntary discharge of principal debtor by operation of law.

    On this section: Moratorium provisions applicable to personal guarantors; prohibits institution or continuation of suits or proceedings against guarantor

    Read the full order on eCourts India

The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.

Made under this section, and citing it

12 instruments name this provision in its title or its text without being made under it.

All subordinate legislation

Questions about Section 101

What have the courts held on Section 101 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code?

Mahendra Kumar Rajpal vs Ministry of Corporate Affairs (21 May 2021) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Moratorium provisions; whether applicable to personal guarantors. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court.

How do I find court cases under Section 101 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code?

In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 101, section 101 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, section 101 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Mahendra Kumar Rajpal vs Ministry of Corporate Affairs (21 May 2021).

What should I read with Section 101 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and has it changed?

Its own text turns on section 96 (Interim moratorium), section 100 (Admission or rejection of application), section 114 (Order of Adjudicating Authority on repayment plan), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 12 instruments name it without being made under it, most recently Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Advisory Committee) Regulations, 2017 (2017), then Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Engagement of Research Associates and Consultants) Regulations, 2017 (2017).

When was Section 101 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code enacted?

Section 101 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, cited as Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 101, was enacted on 28 May 2016 as Act 31 of 2016. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.

Other sections of this Act

Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.