Flat-buyer classification depends on complete cancellation; incomplete refund and uncancelled booking documents keep buyers in the purchase category.

A cancellation affidavit did not by itself end the flat purchase relationship where no refund had been made and the booking documents were neither cancelled nor surrendered. Because the appellants had also communicated their decision to continue with the flat before refund was effected, the subsisting contractual position remained that of flat buyers. The classification had to reflect the real status between the parties, and incomplete cancellation could not justify shifting them to the refund category. The appellants were therefore entitled to be included in the flat-buyer category.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants, who had earlier filed a cancellation affidavit but had not received the refundable amount and whose booking documents had not been cancelled or terminated, were entitled to be treated as flat buyers instead of being placed in the refund category.

Analysis: The cancellation affidavit stated that the appellants would have no dues only after receipt of the refundable amount and surrender of the booking documents. Since no refund was made and the documents were not cancelled, the contractual relationship was not brought to an end. The appellants had also communicated their decision to continue with the flat before the refund was effected. The classification adopted by the resolution professional had to reflect the real subsisting position between the parties, and the mere existence of a cancellation affidavit did not by itself justify exclusion from the flat-buyer category where the cancellation remained incomplete.

Conclusion: The appellants were entitled to be included in the category of flat buyers, and their claim could not be confined to the refund category.

---