https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408229 Homebuyers invoking section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code after the 2019 regime had to satisfy the class threshold of 100 homebuyers or 10% of the total, whichever was less; a petition by only two homebuyers failed that requirement and was not maintainable. The Tribunal also treated an attempt to enforce a RERA refund order through insolvency as an impermissible recovery mechanism, directing that execution lie before the forum that issued the order. The tripartite arrangement with the bank further undermined maintainability because the bank had not been impleaded and the applicant was not treated as the relevant financial creditor. en-us Tue, 27 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Jun 2021 17:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408229 Homebuyers invoking section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code after the 2019 regime had to satisfy the class threshold of 100 homebuyers or 10% of the total, whichever was less; a petition by only two homebuyers failed that requirement and was not maintainable. The Tribunal also treated an attempt to enforce a RERA refund order through insolvency as an impermissible recovery mechanism, directing that execution lie before the forum that issued the order. The tripartite arrangement with the bank further undermined maintainability because the bank had not been impleaded and the applicant was not treated as the relevant financial creditor. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 27 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408229