9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 1304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... permitted, the cost that the homebuyers will have to pay, would be much higher, inasmuch as the offer made by the resolution applicants could be after taking into consideration the price of escalation, etc. As against this, the Promoter has filed a specific undertaking specifying therein that the cost of the flat would not be escalated and that he would honour the BBA signed by the previous management. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 7534 OF 2021 - - - Dated:- 27-4-2022 - L. NAGESWARA RAO And B. R. GAVAI , JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Mani Bhushan Sinha, Adv. Mr. Pranab Prakash, AOR For the Respondent : Mr. Harish Malik. Adv Mr. Alok Tripathi, AOR Mr. Abhigya Kushwah, AOR Ms. Sunita Yadav, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Adv. ORDER B.R. GAVAI, J. 1. The present appeal challenges the order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the NCLAT ) dated 22nd November, 2021, in I.A. No.1115 of 2020 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1507 of 2019, thereby rejecting the Modification Application filed by the appellant herein. Vide the impugned order, the N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant herein to file proposed settlement terms/plan disclosing all material particulars with regard to completion of the housing project. Accordingly, the appellant herein submitted/filed the proposed settlement terms/plan on 13th February, 2020. The IRP had submitted his status report a day prior, on 12th February, 2020, stating therein that most of the Allottees decided to have possession of the flats. In the meantime, the appellant settled the matter with the respondent No.2 herein. Despite the settlement with the respondent No.2 and appellant s readiness and willingness to complete the project, the NCLAT, vide order dated 26th February, 2020, modified the interim order dated 19th December, 2019 and directed the IRP to go ahead with the constitution of CoC and carry forward the CIRP. The said order dated 26th February, 2020 was passed by the NCLAT on the ground that the settlement arrived at by the appellant was only with the respondent No.2 and the settlement plan did not encompass all the Allottees. 8. The appellant therefore approached this Court by way of Civil Appeal No. 1928 of 2020. This Court vide order dated 5th March, 2020, permitted the appellant to approa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dance with the decision taken in the meeting dated 23rd October, 2021. 12. Shri D.N. Goburdhun, learned Senior Counsel strongly opposes the prayer made on behalf of the appellant. He submits that the appellant is not at all interested in completing the project. He submits that the proposed settlement terms/plan is not a bona fide one but only to delay the completion of the project. He submits that the initiation of CIRP proceedings would ensure the completion of the project and would be in the interest of the homebuyers. He therefore prays for dismissal of the present appeal. 13. Shri Abhigya Kushwah, learned counsel, would submit that most of the homebuyers are interested in getting the possession of the flats. He therefore submits that this Court may pass appropriate orders taking into consideration the interests of the purchasers of the flats. 14. A perusal of the record would reveal that after the order was passed by this Court on 5th March, 2020, the appellant submitted a Revised Proposed Settlement Plan on 15th March, 2021. The IRP also submitted its Revised Status Report on 25th March, 2021 before the NCLAT. An email dated 9th July, 2021, addressed by Senior Investm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... failed to take into consideration the minutes of the said meeting dated 23rd October, 2021. Not only that, but the NCLAT has also not taken into consideration the Revised Status Report dated 3rd November, 2021 submitted by the IRP. 19. An additional affidavit dated 27th December, 2021, has now been filed by the Promoter, Shri Kashi Nath Shukla before this Court. It will be relevant to reproduce the same, which is as under: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7534 OF 2021 IN THE MATTER OF: ANAND MURTI ... APPELLANT VERSUS Soni Infratech Pvt. Ltd Anr. ... RESPONDENTS AFFIDAVIT I K.N. Shukla son of Sh Kailash Nath Shukla resident of C35 Sector 30, Noida, UP 201301 around 68 Years age and the major share holder of M/S K N Consultant pvt Ltd. which is promoter of M/S Soni Infratech Pvt Ltd, (Corporate Debtor) Having its Registered office at 517 A, Narain Manzil, 23, Barakhmbha Road Connaught place, New Delhi110001, presently do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under: 1. That I am conversant with the facts of the case as such I am competent to affirm this affidavit. 2. That I am the original land ow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ails pertaining how this project will be managed to be completed with funds planning and repayment to all Creditors. 13. That I say that I will complete the stage wise construction within 6 months to 15 months (+/3 Months) in phased manner from the date of Order. Particulars Tower Time in Months (+/3 Months) Stage I T8T12 Within 69 14 months Stage II T1T4 Within 12 months Stage III T5T7 Within 15 months 14. That I say, I had committed in open court and accordingly arranged ₹ 10 Crore to start the project immediately without any delay and I will ensure this will be started within 1530 days. 15. That I have already agreed in my Resolution plan that the Cost of the Flat will not be escalated and agreed to honor the BBA signed by the previous management. 16. That as per the data before the LD IRP only 9 home buyers out of 452 Home Buyers wanted the refund and in my Resolution Plan I have agreed to refu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompleted stagewise within a period of 6 months to 15 months (+/3 months) in a phased manner; (b)That the promoter has arranged an amount of ₹ 10 crores to start the project immediately without any delay and that he will ensure that the project would be started within 1530 days; (c) That the cost of the flat will not be escalated and that the promoter is agreeable to honour the BBA signed by the previous management; (d)That SBI Cap Ventures Ltd. has already shown interest for further loan of ₹ 100 crore; (e) That the promoter has given his consent to make a team of 5 persons, 2 from homebuyer s side and 2 from the management side and that the entire process will be monitored by the IRP. 22. Taking into consideration the salient features of the undertaking given on affidavit by the Promoter, Shri Kashi Nath Shukla and the fact that there are only seven out of the 452 homebuyers, who opposed the Settlement Plan, we find that it will rather be in the interest of the homebuyers that the appellant/promoter is permitted to complete the project as undertaken by him. It is pertinent to note that he has agreed that the cost of the flat will not be escalated. He has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
