2022 (5) TMI 487 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Seeking consideration of claims submitted by all the allottees in Haritham tower before the last date stated and also the claims submitted pursuant to email send by the 2nd Respondent after the last date before the notice is issued calling committee of creditors - direction to 2nd Respondent to see that the claims submitted are only the allottees of The Greens Township Project Including the Haritham Tower and to exclude those claims which are submitted by creditors from Ernakulam Project - direction that details of all claims received, with the receipt date, be intimated to the claimants and to take corrective action prior to formation of CoC if objections are raised by the claimants - direction that all claims received prior to 01.01.2022 be verified prior to the formation of Committee of Creditors and selection of Authorized representative - direction that the claim of Thomas Kuruvilla (who has flats only in Prakrithi Towers) be made available to the applicant for scrutiny - direction that 2nd Respondent to postpone the committee of creditors meeting to be scheduled - interest rate for calculation of Financial Debt as on commencement of Insolvency be as per the provisions of the RERA act or as per the contract whichever is higher - direction that the element of Compensation, allowable under RERA Act at least on the notional rental lost due to delay be allowed. HELD THAT - It is evident from the records that out of the 53 members of the Applicant Association, claims of 22 members were admitted before the 01.01.2022 and they had attended through Authorized Representative in the 1st Meeting of COC. Thereafter on submission of appropriate documents, the claims of all the members of the Applicant association were also admitted and they have taken part in the decision-making process through duly appointed Authorized Representative. Therefore, the Applicant herein is factually beneficiaries due to the decisions taken in the 1st Meeting of CoC held on 22.02.2022 who were part of CoC and had agreed to extent the Interim Finance for the CIRP. There are no provision in the IBC, 2016 allowing the claimants to scrutinize the claims made by other claimants. To sum up, after analysing the entire gamut of the issue, we are of the considered opinion that IRP being an officer of the Tribunal under the provisions of the IBC, 2016 and Regulations is to verify and collate the claims submitted by the claimants and follow the process as laid down in the Regulations for admission of the claims. In view of the fact that all the members of the Applicant Association are part of the CoC, through the Authorized Representative, their grievance has already been settled by the IRP/RP itself. As stated, other reliefs cannot be granted to the Applicants through this application. There are no merit in this application, which is dismissed as not maintainable. Application dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Consideration of claims submitted by allottees of Haritham Tower.
2. Exclusion of claims from creditors of the Ernakulam Project.
3. Verification and corrective actions for claims prior to the formation of the Committee of Creditors (CoC).
4. Postponement of the CoC meeting.
5. Calculation of Financial Debt interest rate and compensation under RERA Act.
6. Implementation of decisions taken in the first CoC meeting.
7. Appointment of an authorized representative for Haritham Tower allottees.
8. Validity and inclusion of claims, particularly those of Thomas Kuruvilla.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Consideration of Claims Submitted by Allottees of Haritham Tower:
The Applicant, M/s Haritham Buyers Association, sought directives for the 2nd Respondent to consider claims submitted by allottees in Haritham Tower before the last date stated in the paper publication dated 21.12.2021, and also claims submitted pursuant to emails sent after the last date. The Tribunal noted that 22 claims were admitted before 01.01.2022, and subsequent claims were also admitted upon submission of appropriate documents. Thus, the claims were considered, and the applicants participated in the CoC through an authorized representative.

2. Exclusion of Claims from Creditors of the Ernakulam Project:
The Applicant requested the exclusion of claims submitted by creditors from the Ernakulam Project. The Tribunal did not find any provision in the IBC, 2016, allowing claimants to scrutinize the claims made by other claimants. The IRP/RP is responsible for verifying and collating claims as per the regulations.

3. Verification and Corrective Actions for Claims Prior to the Formation of the CoC:
The Applicant sought verification of all claims received before 01.01.2022. The Tribunal observed that the 2nd Respondent had admitted claims based on supporting documents like sales agreements, construction agreements, and proof of payment. The process followed was uniform and in accordance with the regulations.

4. Postponement of the CoC Meeting:
The Applicant requested the postponement of the CoC meeting scheduled for 22.02.2022 until all claims were included. The Tribunal noted that the first meeting of the CoC was held on 22.02.2022 with valid claims received by the last date mentioned in the public announcement. The authorized representative was appointed, and the meeting proceeded as scheduled.

5. Calculation of Financial Debt Interest Rate and Compensation under RERA Act:
The Applicant sought the interest rate for calculating Financial Debt as per RERA provisions or the contract, whichever is higher, and compensation for notional rental loss due to delay. The Tribunal stated that the IRP applied interest rates as per the regulations and could not accept claims for notional rent if not included in the contract.

6. Implementation of Decisions Taken in the First CoC Meeting:
The Applicant sought to stay the implementation of decisions taken in the first CoC meeting until IA(IBC)/39(KOB)/2022 was disposed of. The Tribunal dismissed the application as the claims were admitted, and the applicants were part of the CoC through the authorized representative.

7. Appointment of an Authorized Representative for Haritham Tower Allottees:
The Applicant requested the appointment of an authorized representative for Haritham Tower allottees. The Tribunal confirmed that an authorized representative was appointed, and the applicants participated in the CoC meetings through this representative.

8. Validity and Inclusion of Claims, Particularly Those of Thomas Kuruvilla:
The Applicant raised concerns about the claims of Thomas Kuruvilla, alleging he had no property in the land owned by the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal noted that the claims were admitted based on supporting documents, and the IRP followed a uniform process. The Tribunal found no merit in the application, dismissing it as not maintainable.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed IA(IBC)/39(KOB)/2022 and IA(IBC)/51(KOB)/2022 as not maintainable. The claims of the Applicant Association members were admitted, and they participated in the CoC through an authorized representative. The Tribunal found no provision allowing claimants to scrutinize other claims and confirmed that the IRP followed the process laid down in the regulations.