A status quo agreement is a contract that contains provisions governing how a bidder in a company can buy, sell or vote shares of the target company. A status quo agreement can effectively paralyze or stop the hostile takeover process if the parties are unable to negotiate a friendly agreement. During the status quo period, a new agreement is negotiated, which generally changes the original loan repayment plan. This option is used as an alternative to bankruptcy or enforced execution if the borrower cannot repay the loan. The status quo agreement allows the lender to save some value from the loan. In the event of forced execution, the lender must receive nothing. By working with the borrower, the lender can improve its chances of repaying some of the outstanding debt. In her judgment, Mostyn J said: “I was told that it was “usual practice” to agree to such an agreement. If this is a common practice, I suggest that it is a practice that should cease immediately.
It is not connoisseurs who are in court. If the parties wish to agree on a moratorium for negotiations, the request should be issued in due course and then ask the court to suspend the proceedings during negotiations. Otherwise, as I pointed out in the argument, it is easy to get angry at the clear parliamentary intent…… I propose that under no circumstances, in the future, a private moratorium should ever be regarded as a stop to the watch when it comes to taking into account delays. In other words, a privately agreed moratorium at the end of the deadline should never be considered a good reason for delay in the future. Some local leaders of the princely states have tried to buy time by declaring that they will sign the status quo agreement, but not the accession instrument until they have had time to make up their minds. In response, the Indian government considered that it would only sign status quo agreements with the states that joined the Union.  Until August 15, 1947, the agreed date and date of India`s independence, all but four princely states, which are Indian, signed about 560 of them, both the accession instrument and the status quo agreement with India.
The exceptions were Hyderabad, a large state in central South India, which received a two-month extension, and three small states of Gujarat: Junagadh and its subsidiaries (Mangrol and Babariawad).  Legal action must be initiated within certain time frames under the Limitation Act of 1980, but if, for some reason, it is not reasonable or inexpensive to adopt the procedure within that time frame, the parties may agree, by a status quo agreement, not to expel it and, if they need it later, not be prevented by the otherwise limitation period. The agreement is to extend or suspend the limitation period, since the parties do not raise the restriction in question.