2019 (3) TMI 1994 - SC - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Supreme Court orders refund with interest in real estate case, sets aside insolvency proceedings

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellant, an allottee in a real estate project, ordering Respondent No.3 to refund the appellant with 10.7% ... Allottee in a real estate project - right to possession or refund - entitlement to refund with interest - setting aside insolvency proceedingAllottee in a real estate project - right to possession or refund - entitlement to refund with interest - The appellant, being an allottee who declined possession offered by the promoter, is entitled to refund of monies paid together with interest. - HELD THAT: - The Court recognised the appellant's status as an allottee in the respondent promoter's real estate project and observed that an allottee has either a right to take possession or to claim refund. The appellant had been offered possession but declined to accept it. On that factual premise the Court held that the appellant is entitled to a refund of the amounts paid. The Court directed that the refund be made by Respondent No.3 within four weeks and awarded interest at the rate of 10.7% on the refund amount. The order was expressly confined to the facts of the case and not to be treated as a precedent.Refund to the appellant by Respondent No.3 within four weeks with 10.7% interest.Setting aside insolvency proceeding - The insolvency proceeding initiated by Respondent No.2 was set aside. - HELD THAT: - In view of the appellant's entitlement to a refund and the consequent directions for repayment by the promoter, the Court set aside the insolvency proceeding filed by Respondent No.2. The setting aside was made operative alongside the directive for refund and interest.Insolvency proceeding filed by Respondent No.2 is set aside.Final Conclusion: The appeal is disposed of by directing Respondent No.3 to refund the monies to the appellant within four weeks with interest at 10.7%; the insolvency proceeding by Respondent No.2 is set aside; the order is not to be treated as a precedent and pending applications are disposed of. The Supreme Court ordered that the appellant, an allottee in a real estate project, is entitled to a refund from Respondent No.3 with 10.7% interest within four weeks. The order is not a precedent and insolvency proceedings by Respondent No.2 are set aside. The appeal and pending applications are disposed of.