TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (6) TMI 125
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and Bankruptcy (Petition to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Respondent claiming a default of financial debt of Rs. 1,41,44,209/- (Rupees One Crore Forty One Lakh Forty Four Thousand Two Hundred and Nine Only) as on 31.08.2019. 2. Brief facts of the case as stated in the petition are listed below: (1) The Applicant booked an apartment bearing No. H 1405 in Project Mantri Webcity being developed by the Corporate Debtor vide 'agreement of sale' hereinafter referred as "BBA" dated 12.08.2014 and 'agreement for construction' referred to as AFC dated 12.08.2014 for a total sale consideration value of Rs. 85,72,813/-. Apart from the above agreements, a pre-EM....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Buy-back. The Respondent soon thereafter shared revised calculations vide email dated 28.11.2017 and assured releasing its payments. The Corporate Debtor also defaulted in paying pre-EMI of Rs. 5,84,494/-. On 14.03.2018 the Corporate Debtor vide email again assured the Applicant that the entire due amount will be paid. (5) The Applicant issued Legal Notice dated 26.10.2018 through Legal Counsel calling upon the Respondent to refund the full and final settlement including amount that PNBHFL has disbursed, total settlement amounting to Rs. 1,55,90,914/- within 15 days of receipt of Notice. (6) The Applicant approached Karnataka RERA, Bengaluru under section 31 of Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 against the Corpora....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this ground alone. The Respondent submits that the petitioner is a speculative investor and not a financial creditor. (3) The Respondent has produced its financial statements for the year 2018-19 showing that the company is solvent. The Respondent states that the company has direct 370 employees, 1200 employees indirectly employed through contractors. (4) It is further submitted that clause 21 of the Construction Agreement dated 12.08.2014 and clause 10 of the Agreement for sale of undivided interest dated 12.08.2014 provides for settlement of dispute through arbitration by appointing a Sole arbitrator. (5) The Respondent has placed reliance on decision of Hon'ble NCLAT in CP (IB) No. 11ALD/2018 in Ajia Walia v. Sunworld Residency....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd Bankruptcy Code, (Amendment) Ordinance, 2019 dated 28.12.2019 the financial creditors who are homebuyers of Real Estate Project can file a petition under section 7 of the Code, 2016, jointly only if there are 100 of such homebuyers or if they are 10% of total homebuyers whichever is less. However, in the instant petition, only 2 Homebuyers have filed the petition which neither amounts to 10% of the total class of financial creditors or 100 Financial Creditors and therefore this petition cannot be entertained. 8. We may further clarify that it is a settled position of law that the provisions of Code cannot be invoked for recovery of outstanding amount but it can be invoked to initiate CIRP for justified reasons as per the Code. The Hon&#....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecree. It cannot file an application U/s 7 of IBC as the amount claimed under a decree being an adjudicated amount was not a consideration for time value of money, and therefore, does not fall within the realm of Section 5(8) of the IBC. In giving this decision, the Hon'ble NCLAT also considered its earlier decision in its order dated 07.02.2020 in the matter of G. Eswara Rao Vs. Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund & Ors where also it had held that a Decree cannot be executed by filing an Application U/s 7 of the IBC. In the instant case the Petitioner is before this Tribunal mainly to execute its decree and hence would not be eligible to file a Petition for execution of the decree received from the Karnataka, RERA. We may add that if ho....