Homebuyer's delayed insolvency claim in real estate project-must be considered in resolution plan despite CoC approval; rejection set aside

Whether a homebuyer's belated claim can be denied merely because the CoC has approved the resolution plan was the dominant issue. Relying on SC authority that bona fide allottees who paid substantial consideration cannot be relegated to mere refund claimants contrary to the IBC's object, and following prior NCLAT precedent approved by the SC, the tribunal held that rejection of the application was legally unsustainable. The claim, as already reflected in the information memorandum prepared by the RP, was required to be substantively dealt with in the plan; consequently, the impugned order was set aside, the application was partly allowed, the RP was directed to furnish the claimant's details to the resolution applicant, and an addendum was to be placed before the CoC for consideration. Appeal allowed.

---

---

1. ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED

(i) Whether a homebuyer's claim submitted after the Committee of Creditors has approved the resolution plan can be admitted/entertained as a belated claim in the list of creditors during CIRP.

(ii) Whether, despite non-admission of a belated claim, the homebuyer's liability/claim reflected in the corporate debtor's records and in the Information Memorandum must be dealt with in the resolution plan by requiring an addendum to be placed before the Committee of Creditors and considered by the Adjudicating Authority at the stage of plan approval.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue (i): Admissibility of a belated homebuyer claim after approval of the resolution plan by the Committee of Creditors

Legal framework (as discussed by the Tribunal): The Tribunal proceeded on the basis of the CIRP claim submission framework under the Code/Regulations and the principle applied in prior Tribunal decisions that, "as law exists today", claims not filed in time cannot be included in the list of creditors after the plan is approved by the Committee of Creditors.

Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal accepted the undisputed factual position that the claim was submitted after the resolution plan had already been approved by the Committee of Creditors. It noted that the Adjudicating Authority rejected the application precisely on that ground. Applying the Tribunal's earlier approach, it agreed that a claim filed belatedly after such approval is not to be admitted as a claim for inclusion in the creditor list during the CIRP.

Conclusion: The belated claim could not be directed to be admitted as a claim in the list of creditors after the plan's approval by the Committee of Creditors.

Issue (ii): Consequence of non-filing/non-admission where the homebuyer's allotment and payments are reflected in the Information Memorandum/records-whether the resolution plan must nevertheless address such liability through an addendum process

Legal framework (as discussed by the Tribunal): The Tribunal relied on the principle that claims reflected in the corporate debtor's record ought to be included in the Information Memorandum and appropriately dealt with in the resolution plan to avoid "inequitable and unfair resolution". It also proceeded on the basis that extinguishment of claims occurs only after approval of the plan by the Adjudicating Authority, not merely upon approval by the Committee of Creditors.

Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal treated as undisputed that the unit/allottee details were reflected by the resolution professional in the Information Memorandum under the category of allottees who had not filed claims. It found that, on these facts, rejection of relief solely because the claim was belated (after Committee of Creditors' approval) could not stand, because the appellant's liability details were already part of the Information Memorandum/records and therefore required to be dealt with in the resolution plan framework. The Tribunal adopted the remedial mechanism of directing the resolution professional to provide the appellant's details (as reflected in records) to the resolution applicant, requiring the resolution applicant to prepare an addendum, placing it before the Committee of Creditors, and ensuring that the Adjudicating Authority considers the addendum and Committee of Creditors' minutes when approving the plan. This approach was preferred as it mitigates hardship without reopening the CIRP by admitting fresh claims into the creditor list at a stage after Committee of Creditors' approval.

Conclusion: The impugned rejection was set aside. The appellant's claim, to the extent reflected in the Information Memorandum/records, was directed to be dealt with in the resolution plan via an addendum to be considered by the Committee of Creditors and by the Adjudicating Authority at the time of plan approval; a three-month timeline was fixed for completing this exercise, and the resolution professional was directed to bring the order to the Adjudicating Authority's notice so that the addendum process can be awaited and considered with the pending plan approval.

---