https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296259 Failure to deliver possession within the contractually agreed period in a housing project was treated as default for section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, where the homebuyers had paid substantial amounts and the possession date, including grace period, had expired without delivery or refund. The Tribunal found the application complied with the formal requirements for initiation of CIRP and held that later RERA timelines did not override the contractual obligation or the Code, given section 238. The force majeure defence was also rejected. The insolvency application was therefore admitted, with appointment of the interim resolution professional and consequential moratorium. en-us Tue, 01 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jul 2021 19:55:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296259 Failure to deliver possession within the contractually agreed period in a housing project was treated as default for section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, where the homebuyers had paid substantial amounts and the possession date, including grace period, had expired without delivery or refund. The Tribunal found the application complied with the formal requirements for initiation of CIRP and held that later RERA timelines did not override the contractual obligation or the Code, given section 238. The force majeure defence was also rejected. The insolvency application was therefore admitted, with appointment of the interim resolution professional and consequential moratorium. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 01 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296259