New Delhi, Sep 17 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Wednesday restrained Supertech Realtors and its suspended director from creating any third party rights in the ambitious 'Supernova' project in Noida.

Supertech Realtors is a wholly owned subsidiary of the beleaguered realty major Supertech Ltd which is facing insolvency proceedings and is constructing a mixed-use real estate project 'Supernova' consisting of residential, commercial, office space, studio apartment, service apartment and shopping centres in Sector 94 of Noida.

The building under the project is believed to comprise 80 floors, being the tallest building in Delhi-NCR with a 300-metre height.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan and N Kotiswar Singh also impleaded the Noida Authority as one of the parties in the matter.

"The appellant (suspended director Ram Kishore Arora) and his associates are restrained from alienating and/or creating third party rights in the subject property," the bench directed.

On being pointed out by advocate Rajiv Jain that Supertech Realtors has not been cooperating with the interim resolution professional (IRP) appointed by the national company law tribunal, the bench said, "The appellant is directed to cooperate with the IRP and provide full assistance/records, as may be required." It added that the soft copy of the entire record to be provided by the appellant to the IRP shall also be supplied to the amicus curiae.

The bench further said that the IRP may, meanwhile, complete the statutory requirements as may be required, with advance notice to the amicus curiae.

At the outset, senior advocate K Parmeshwar along with advocate Govind Jee, appearing for Supernova Apartment Owners Association (SNAOA), pointed out that since registry of properties and flats of home buyers involve Noida Authority, hence, it should be made a party.

Parmeshwar and Govind Jee also flagged that Supertech Realtors may be delineating some of the properties in the project.

The bench accepted the arguments and allowed the interlocutory application of SNAOA.

Senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia, also appearing for another group of home buyers, submitted that the Supernova project is 70 per cent complete and it cannot be compared with other real estate projects, where a court-monitored resolution process was adopted.

Justice Surya Kant told Bhatia that the court was well aware of the fact and that is why it had suggested forming a committee to bring in a co-developer in a transparent manner, who could infuse some funds in the project. Otherwise, it was a fit case where the entire project would have landed with the CBI for investigation, he added.

The top court allowed other interlocutory applications and listed the matter for further hearing on October 8.

It allowed Arora and the Supertech Realtors to file their response to the report submitted by the amicus.

In his report submitted last week, Jain suggested the top court that it should adopt a court-monitored hybrid resolution mechanism on the lines of Amrapali and Unitech Groups but headed by former apex court judge Navin Sinha for the completion of the Supertech Realtors' ambitious Supernova project in Noida.

Jain has submitted that all stakeholders including homebuyers, financial creditors, banks, financial institutions and others have expressed confidence in a court-monitored process of resolution.

"The evolved jurisprudence in the cases of Amrapali, JAL/YEIDA (Jaypee Group case), and Supertech reveal a clear trajectory; when ordinary insolvency processes fail to protect homebuyers, the judiciary has not hesitated to innovate," the report of the amicus has said.

The report has further said in the present matter too, a court-monitored hybrid mechanism, strengthened by the fit and proper standard for developers and project managers, was both necessary and viable.

"Such a framework will balance the rights of financial creditors with the overriding need to deliver homes to buyers, thereby achieving the 'complete justice' that this court has repeatedly sought to achieve in analogous cases," it added.

Jain suggested the name of former apex court judge Navin Sinha and former chief justice of Jammu and Kashmir High Court M M Kumar, former president of National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and former member of NHRC supervising the process.

"The promoter/appellant should be displaced from control; if necessary, his role may be limited to technical co-operation only. Further, the key management personnel should also not be part of any resolution mechanism," he said.

The report suggested a forensic audit of the accounts of the Supertech Realtors and its parent company Supertech Ltd by a "reputed and experienced" entity.

The amicus said the opinions of the homebuyers were divided over the model of resolution process to be adopted for completion of the project.

The 721-page report of the amicus has further suggested the court to appoint a new board of directors of the Supertech Realtors and a Project Management Consultant, like the NBCC for the completion of the ambitious project. On August 29, the top court appointed Jain as amicus curiae, noting the complexity of the issue at hand.

Arora has challenged the August 13 order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) which has cleared the way for insolvency proceedings against Supertech Realtors.

The appellate tribunal upheld the previous order passed by the Delhi bench of the NCLT, which on June 12, last year directed the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process over a petition filed by Bank of Maharashtra, claiming default. PTI MNL MNL KSS KSS

Restriction on property alienation bars promoter from creating third party rights and mandates cooperation with the insolvency professional. The court restrained the promoter and associates from alienating or creating third party rights in the Supernova project, impleaded the local authority, and directed the suspended director to cooperate with the interim resolution professional by providing full records (including soft copies to the IRP and amicus). The IRP was authorized to complete statutory requirements with notice to the amicus. The amicus proposed a court monitored hybrid resolution, displacement of promoter control, appointment of a new board and project management consultant, and a forensic audit to secure completion for homebuyers.