9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (5) TMI 978 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyCIRP - Application filed for intervention of home buyers dismissed - dismissal on the ground that Appellant had no locus to maintain the said application at this stage when the proceedings are pending and no order of admission has been passed - CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Financial Creditors. Whether an application like the one in hand could have been maintained at the instance of the Appellant before the admission of the application under Section 7 of the Code? - HELD THAT - There is no dispute that the Applicants/Appellants are the homebuyers who have booked their units in the said project being developed by the Corporate Debtor. However, as submitted by counsel for Respondent, the units which has been booked by the Appellants are in the Tower Joy and Spark which is far beyond completion. It is further the case of the Respondent that there are large number of homebuyers and if all of them keep on filing the application before the order of admission then the timeline which is provided for the purpose of pursuing the application filed under Section 7 of the Code shall be adversely affected as also the interest of the Financial Creditor who has initiated the proceedings. The order passed in the case of SURINDER PAL SINGH ORS. VERSUS SPAZE TOWERS PVT. LTD. 2023 (5) TMI 928 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI , this court was dealing with an application which was filed by homebuyer as an Intervener in the proceedings under Section 7 of the Code and held that the Application under Section 7 is not maintainable till the application under Section 7 is admitted. However, a window was kept open for the Applicant by observing thus it shall be open to the Appellant to file appropriate fresh application in the event application is admitted under Section 7 IBC. In the case of PRAYAG POLYTECH PVT. LTD. VERSUS HIND TRADEX LTD. 2019 (8) TMI 1867 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI it was held that In that view of the matter, there is no requirement for intervention of any Directors or shareholders of the Financial Creditor or any other party before admission of Application under Section 7 of IBC. If the application is admitted, it would be open to any aggrieved party to move before this Appellate Tribunal. - In the case of Shrem Residency Pvt. Ltd. 2023 (1) TMI 551 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI this court has held that the only thing which is to be taken into consideration at the time of admission of section 7 of the Code that there is a debt and default. There are no merit in the present appeal and the same is hereby dismissed.
Issues Involved:
The issue of maintaining an intervention application before the admission of the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Comprehensive Details: Issue 1: Intervention Application The appeal was against the dismissal of an intervention application filed by homebuyers during the pendency of an application under Section 7 of the Code by a Financial Creditor. The intervention was sought based on a favorable order from the UP Real Estate Regulatory Authority. Issue 2: Legal Interpretation The main contention was whether the intervention application could be maintained before the admission of the Section 7 application. The Respondent argued that the Appellants lacked locus standi at this stage, which was supported by previous tribunal decisions. Issue 3: Precedent and Interpretation The Appellant relied on previous tribunal decisions to support their stance that an application under Section 65 of the Code could be filed before admission. However, the Respondent cited cases where intervention before admission was deemed inappropriate. Issue 4: Decision and Rationale The Tribunal found that the Appellant's reliance on previous decisions was misplaced. It was concluded that intervention before admission of the Section 7 application was not justified. The appeal was dismissed without costs. This summary provides a detailed overview of the issues involved in the legal judgment, including the arguments presented by both parties, the interpretation of relevant legal provisions, and the final decision reached by the Tribunal.
|
