9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 249X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... six months even after approval of the plan by the Adjudicating Authority and they were to be dealt with by SRA. Admittedly, after the approval of the plan, SRA called for the claims from the Applicants who have again submitted their claims which according to the Appellant has not been verified. From the order of the Adjudicating Authority, it is clear that the claims were filed by the Appellants after the cut-off date. There are no doubt that SRA has to take care of the claims as per Clause 18.4 (v) of the Resolution Plan and whatever amount is entitled to the Appellant to be paid as per Clause 18.4(v) shall be considered and paid by the SRA because the Resolution Plan binds all concerned including the SRA, Appellants and all stakeholders. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication seeking a direction that they should be given the units which are claimed to be allotted to the Appellants. The prayers made in the IA No.1395 of 2022 are quoted for ready reference in paragraph 1:- a. direct the Resolution Applicants/Respondents No. 1 2 to raise the demands as per the Allotment letter and grant possession of the Residential Units being IH 2-Plot- 344 and IH 2-Plot-339 in the Ireo Hamlet 2 project and IH 4- Plot-B23 and IH 4-Plot-C127 in the Ireo Hamlet 4 project of the Resolution Applicant; b. Direct the Respondents No.1 2 to enter into fresh Builder Buyer Agreement with the applicant herein as per the terms of the Approved Resolution Plan; c. Direct the Respondents No.1 and 2 to implement the Resolution Plan in a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raph 7 of the impugned order, the Adjudicating Authority made following observations:- 7. In any event, there is a treatment for belated claimants in the Resolution Plan approved by the CoC and that is binding by all the parties. 3. Counsel for the Appellants challenging the order contends that the Appellants having filed the claims before approval of the plan by the Adjudicating Authority, they are entitled to be allotted units. It is submitted that the Resolution Professional ought to have verified the claims and reflect their names in the Information Memorandum. Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order has observed that the Information Memorandum does not reflect the name of the Applicants. Appellant has filed the copy of the Resolut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant has not been verified. 5. From the order of the Adjudicating Authority, it is clear that the claims were filed by the Appellants after the cut-off date. We, thus, have no doubt that SRA has to take care of the claims as per Clause 18.4 (v) of the Resolution Plan and whatever amount is entitled to the Appellant to be paid as per Clause 18.4(v) shall be considered and paid by the SRA because the Resolution Plan binds all concerned including the SRA, Appellants and all stakeholders. 6. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any error in the order of the Adjudicating Authority rejecting the application. However, as noticed above, the Adjudicating Authority itself has observed that the claims have to be dealt with in accordance with Claus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
