M/S.Milan Textile Enterprises Pvt. Ltd vs The Initiating Officer on 27 November, 2025
(ii) nothing in this sub-section shall be construed to bar an
action against the property of any person, other than the
9/19
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/12/2025 05:21:26 pm )
W.P(MD)No.30435 of 2025
corporate debtor or a person who has acquired such property
through corporate insolvency resolution process or liquidation
process under this Code and fulfils the requirements specified in
this section, against whom such an action may be taken under
such law as may be applicable.”
Section 32A(1) of the Code opens with a non-obstante clause. However,
sub-section 2 of Section 32A does not have a similar clause. But Section
238 of the Code states that the provisions of the Code shall have effect,
notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith in any other law for the
time being in force. A non-obstante clause is a legislative device used
by the Parliament or a legislature to give an overriding effect to what has
been specified in the enacting part of a Section in case of a conflict with
what is contained in the non-obstante clause. Its effect is that in spite of
the inconsistent provisions in any other statute, the provision or the
statute covered by the non-obstante clause will have its full operation and
no provision contained elsewhere would be an impediment (vide
Mohammed Abdul Samad v. State of Telengana (2024 INSC 506). Just
as IBC has a overriding Section, PBPT Act, 1988 also has a overriding
provision in Section 67. When two arrows endowed with equal power
meet in the mid air, they may cancel each other out. Not so in the case of
10/19
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/12/2025 05:21:26 pm )
W.P(MD)No.30435 of 2025
the overriding provisions. The subsequently enacted provision will
prevail.