9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 1304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected the Interim Resolution Professional ("IRP" for short)/Resolution Professional ("RP" for short) to hold the meeting of the Committee of Creditors (hereinafter referred to as "CoC") within ten days from the date of order and decide the future course of action about a resolution for completion of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (hereinafter referred to as "CIRP") of the respondent No.1company (hereinafter referred to as "the Corporate Debtor"). 2. The facts in brief giving rise to the present appeal are as under: 3. The appellant herein is the Suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor. The respondent No.2 herein had booked a flat in the housing project launched by the Corporate Debtor. Subsequently, vide a letter dated 31st July, 2018, the respondent No.2 cancelled the booking and demanded refund of the amount of Rs. 32,27,591/from the Corporate Debtor. 4. On failure of the appellant in refunding the amount, the respondent No.2 filed an application under Section 7 of the IBC against the Corporate Debtor for initiation of CIRP before the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the NCLT"). The NCLT vide order dated 22nd November, 2019, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. Pursuant thereto, the appellant filed the modification application being I.A. No.1115 of 2020 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1507 of 2019 before the NCLAT. However, the NCLAT vide the impugned order dated 22nd November, 2021, has rejected the said application for modification and passed the order as aforesaid. Being aggrieved, the appellant has approached this Court by way of present appeal. 10. We have heard Shri Shyam Divan, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, Shri D.N. Goburdhun, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicantshomebuyers and Shri Abhigya Kushwah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1/ IRP/applicant. 11. Shri Shyam Divan, learned Senior Counsel, would submit that in pursuance to the liberty granted by this Court, the appellant had moved the NCLAT placing on record the settlement with all the stakeholders. He submitted that not only that but in pursuance to an order passed by the NCLAT dated 29th September, 2021, a special meeting of the stakeholders was convened on 23rd October, 2021, wherein the IRP, the representatives of the Corporate Debtor, the financial creditors, ten representatives o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C within four weeks to consider the modified Resolution Plan. The NCLAT further directed that homebuyers may nominate not more than 10 persons, who will participate in the meeting and represent them. The NCLAT further directed that the promoters and the authorized persons of Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. (Financier) would also participate in the meeting so that they can explain the elements of the modified Resolution Plan to the homebuyers. The IRP/RP was directed to place on record the minutes of the meeting after the meeting was convened. The matter was thereafter directed to be listed for hearing on 15th November, 2021. 15. In accordance with the directions issued by the NCLAT, a meeting was convened on 23rd October, 2021. A perusal of the minutes of the meeting dated 23rd October, 2021 would reveal that the 'Modified Resolution Plan' submitted by the Promoter was presented on a Digital Screen. During the presentation, some homebuyers requested for further modification of some contentious points of the 'Modified Resolution Plan'. The perusal of the minutes of the said meeting would further reveal that most of the concerns as expressed on behalf of the homebuyers w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the project transferred to erstwhile promoters i.e. Mr. Sunil Gandhi and Mr. Ashish Bhalla of "Spire Group". 4. That SPIRE Group has launched the project and collected the booking from the home buyers for the said project and appointed construction company ERA Group to complete the project. 5. That After construction of 3040% work, ERA Group has stopped the work due to interse dispute in the ERA group which lead to multiple litigation between the erstwhile promoters. 6. That I have discussed about the delay of the project and after a long discussion and series of meeting, I managed to take back the management of the project in 2017. 7. That I have terminated the Civil contract of ERA and appointed the new contractor i.e. M/s Indsao Infratech and within a period of 18 months we have managed to complete approx 70% of total construction of the project by mid of 2018. The Enclosed Construction audit report by "Qonquest" confirms the stage as approx 70% completed. 8. That I have approached Financial Creditor M/s Edelweiss to grant further loan to complete the project. But Due to stay granted by NCLT in CP No. N0.175/241/242/(ND)/ 2018 arises in the interse disputes betwee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n and the same has been recorded by the LD IRP in the Minutes of the Meeting dated 23.10.2021. 20. That I have also given my consent to make a team of 5 person, 2 from buyer side and 2 from management side and will be monitored by Ld IRP 21. That this affidavit to the additional documents in the present Civil Appeal have been read by me and are found true and correct to my knowledge and belief. 22. That the Annexures are true copies of their respective originals. 23. That the facts stated in the above affidavit are true and correct to my personal knowledge and belief. 24. That No part of the same is false and nothing material have been concealed there from. DEPONENT VERIFICATION I, the above named deponent do hereby verify that the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to my knowledge and belief which I believe to be true. No part of the same is false and nothing material has been concealed there from. Verified at New Delhi, on this 27th day of December, 2021. DEPONENT" 20. The Promoter, Shri Kashi Nath Shukla has also filed an undertaking, thereby undertaking to return the money with interest at the rate of 6% per annum of seven applicants in I.A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g therein that the cost of the flat would not be escalated and that he would honour the BBA signed by the previous management. 24. In that view of the matter, we are inclined to allow the present appeal. Accordingly, we pass the following order: A. The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 22nd November, 2021 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in I.A. No.1115 of 2020 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1507 of 2019 is quashed and set aside; B. The affidavit dated 27th December, 2021 filed by Shri Kashi Nath Shukla, the promoter of the respondent No.1 - Corporate Debtor is taken on record and treated to be an undertaking given to this Court; C. The appellant/promoter is permitted to complete the project as per the deliberations that took place in the Minutes of the Meeting dated 23rd October, 2021 and in accordance with the affidavitcumundertaking dated 27th December, 2021 of the Promoter, Shri Kashi Nath Shukla; D. The modification application being I.A. No.1115 of 2020 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1507 of 2019 before the NCLAT accordingly stands allowed. E. From the date of this order, the IRP shall sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
