2021 (4) TMI 1371 - HC - Indian Laws

Entitlement for rental income - grievance is that the Petitioners have moved applications before the NCLT and the same have not been taken up for hearing and are being adjourned from time to time - HELD THAT - Taking on record the statements of ld. Counsels for both the Respondents, that the matter is listed tomorrow i.e. on 13th April, 2021, this Court does not deem it appropriate to pass any further orders. Needless to add that the difficulty of the Petitioners may be appreciated by the NCLT, and it is hoped that the applications of the Petitioners would be taken up for hearing and orders are passed expeditiously, and if possible, within a period of one month from today. The present petition with all pending applications is disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in rental payments to real estate allottees post initiation of CIRP proceedings.
2. Allegation of NCLT adjourning applications without hearing.
3. Request for early adjudication of the application by the Petitioners.
4. Dispute regarding listing of applications before NCLT.
5. Resolution Professional's submission on the listing of the application.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a case where a group of real estate allottees filed a petition concerning the delay in receiving rental amounts post the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the company responsible for the project. The Petitioners claimed that they were not receiving rental amounts since the appointment of the present Resolution Professional (RP) from October 2020 onwards. The Petitioners expressed their dependency on the rental income and sought early adjudication of their application. The NCLT, represented by Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan, contended that the applications were listed for hearing on a specific date and were adjourned previously due to the Petitioners' absence. However, Mr. Srivatsava, representing the Petitioners, disputed this claim, stating that their application was not listed on the last occasion when they were absent.

The Resolution Professional, represented by Mr. Aditya, informed the court that the application was scheduled for a hearing the following day before the NCLT. The court, after considering the submissions from both sides, refrained from passing further orders. It emphasized the importance of the NCLT addressing the Petitioners' concerns promptly and hoped for the applications to be heard and decided expeditiously, preferably within a month from the judgment date. Consequently, the court disposed of the petition along with all pending applications, instructing the order to be forwarded to the Principal Bench, NCLT, New Delhi through the Registrar, NCLT for necessary action.