Binding resolution plans cannot be used to indefinitely re-scrutinise admitted homebuyer claims or delay flat handover.

Approved resolution plans under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code bind stakeholders and must be implemented within their stipulated timelines. A verification clause in the plan may permit scrutiny of original documents, but it does not authorise a successful resolution applicant to indefinitely re-open or withhold implementation of an already admitted homebuyer claim. Where the resolution professional has verified and admitted the claim, the claimant's name appears in the creditor records, and supporting documents show full payment, the admitted homebuyer entitlement under the plan remains enforceable. The note emphasises that late re-scrutiny cannot be used to defeat a crystallised claim absent legally sustainable proof of fraud.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether, after approval of the resolution plan, the successful resolution applicant could rely on the verification clause to re-scrutinise and withhold implementation of an already admitted homebuyer claim beyond the stipulated timeline; (ii) whether the appellant, whose claim had been admitted by the resolution professional and reflected in the creditor records, was entitled to handover of the allotted flat in terms of the resolution plan.

Issue (i): whether, after approval of the resolution plan, the successful resolution applicant could rely on the verification clause to re-scrutinise and withhold implementation of an already admitted homebuyer claim beyond the stipulated timeline.

Analysis: The approved resolution plan was binding on all stakeholders under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and had to be implemented in accordance with its timelines. The verification clause in the plan permitted scrutiny of original documents within the period contemplated by the plan, but it did not confer an open-ended power on the successful resolution applicant to indefinitely defer implementation or to unsettle claims already admitted by the resolution professional. The resolution professional had already verified and admitted the appellant's claim, the appellant's name appeared in the creditor list, and the respondent did not complete the stipulated verification within time. A post-approval attempt to question authenticity and to hold the flat in abeyance was therefore inconsistent with the finality of the approved plan and the duties assumed under it.

Conclusion: The successful resolution applicant could not, at that belated stage, re-open or indefinitely scrutinise the appellant's admitted claim, and its reliance on the verification clause was rejected.

Issue (ii): whether the appellant, whose claim had been admitted by the resolution professional and reflected in the creditor records, was entitled to handover of the allotted flat in terms of the resolution plan.

Analysis: The appellant had produced the builder-buyer agreement, payment receipts, and confirmation of full payment. The resolution professional had admitted the claim in full and the appellant was shown as a financial creditor/homebuyer in the records placed before the adjudicating authority. On those facts, the appellant fell within the category of homebuyers whose admitted claims were to be honoured by delivery of flats under the resolution plan. The plan could not be used to defeat an admitted entitlement by recourse to a later re-verification exercise, especially when the time for scrutiny had already elapsed and no fraud had been established in a legally sustainable manner.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to handover of the allotted flat and possession could not be withheld on the basis of the impugned re-scrutiny.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the impugned order was set aside, and the respondent was directed to hand over title and physical possession of the allotted flat to the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: Once a resolution plan is approved and a homebuyer's claim stands admitted by the resolution professional, the successful resolution applicant cannot use a verification clause to indefinitely re-open or withhold implementation of that admitted claim beyond the plan's stipulated timelines.

---