TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1284
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with the terms of the approved Resolution Plan. IA No. 1929 of 2024 was disposed of with impugned order dated 27.11.2024, which is noted as below: *** IA-817/2024, IA-818/2024, IA-822/2024, IA-823/2024, IA-826/2024, IA-1929/2024, IA-2344/2024, IA-2703/2024, IA-3880/2024, New IA-5591/2024, New IA-5592/2024: The Ld. Counsel for the SRA produced before us a copy of order dated 25.11.2021, to espouse that in IA-4033/2021 which raised the identical issue this Tribunal remitted the matter to SRA for his consideration. The order passed in IA-4033/2021 reads thus: "ΙΑ-4033/2021: It is submitted by the Counsel for the Applicant that the Resolution Plan in the present matter has already been approved by this Adjudicating Authority on 20th February, 2020. The grievance of the Applicant is in regard to his claim vis-à-vis provision in the Resolution Plan. Let the Petitioner submit his grievance first to the Resolution Applicant which will consider and disposed of this same in accordance with the Resolution plan provision. Accordingly, the Petitioner is directed to approach the Resolution Applicant along with the present application, which will be tr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ituated at Plot No. GH-01, Sector adjoining Techzone-IV, Sport City, Greater Noida to the Appellant; d. Restrain the Respondents from disposing of, alienating or otherwise encumbering the Unit No. B-0102, Tower-B, Area 1560 Sq. ft. ir Misty Heights situated at Plot No. GH-01, Sector adjoining Techzone-IV, Sport City, Greater Noida to any third party; e. pass any other order/direction in the facts and circumstances of the present Appeal and in the interest of the Justice. Submissions of the Appellant- Sanjeev Sangal 3. The Appellant is a homebuyer and an unsecured Financial Creditor of Maple Realcon Pvt. Ltd (Corporate Debtor). The Appellant purchased and was allotted Flat B-0102, Tower-B having Area 1560 Sq.Ft. (Flat) in the project named Misty Heights situated at Plot No. GH-01, Sector adjoining Techzone-IV, Sport City, Greater Noida (Project) for a total sum of Rs. 47,00,000/- by execution of (i) a Builder Buyer Agreement dated 09.03.2018 (BBA) (Pg 65-92/Appeal Vol I); (ii) two Payment Receipts dated 29.07.2016 [Rs. 22,00,000] and 12.08.2016 [Rs. 25,00,000] (Pg 63-64/Appeal Vol I) and (iii) a Letter dated 09.03.2018 issued by the Corporate Debtor confirmin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent did not carry out any of its obligations under the Resolution Plan according to its terms. After 2 years of the Respondent's inaction, the Appellant wrote to the present management and previous management of the Respondent from 16.07.2022 (Pg 338/Appeal Vol II) asking them to carry out those obligation and handover the flat. 10. A perfunctory response on 21.07.2022 (Pg 337-338/Appeal Vol II) was issued by the Respondent and stated that scrutiny of original builder buyer agreement original receipts/bank statements would be carried out and would be reconciled with the documents, books and accounts/ERP of the Corporate Debtor and Claim accepted by the IRP. 11. Notwithstanding that the Respondent by this time had already violated the timelines in the Resolution Plan, it also sought to confer upon itself the power to post facto "reconcile" the Appellant's entitlement with the books of accounts, despite the Ld. AA prohibiting the RP to do so in the Order dated 26.09.2019 (Pg 104/Appeal Vol I). 12. However, as instructed, the Appellant visited the Respondent's site office on 08.08.2022 and 28.10.2022 presented the original BBA and Payment Receipts and was assured that a fresh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es forming part of the Corporate Debtor. However, the Respondents were bombarded with claims from unrelated transactions and entities. Therefore, the Respondent was constrained to put in a Verification Clause in the Resolution Plan itself so as to scrutinise the claims and check their authenticity and genuineness. 18. Respondent- SRA further claims that the Ld. NCLT, while considering the Resolution Plan, duly took cognizance of the fact that the project in question was being undertaken pursuant to a collaboration arrangement between two entities, namely, Euphoria Sports City Private Limited and Mascot Soho Homes Private Limited. Subsequently NCLT directed the Resolution Professional to consider the claims raised in respect of the bookings done through the two entities. However, it is pertinent to submit that the Appellant's claim arises directly against the Corporate Debtor and not through either of the two collaborating entities, namely, Euphoria Sports City Private Limited or Mascot Soho Homes Private Limited. It is further submitted that the Order dated 26.09.2019 pertains exclusively to claims channeled through the said two entities and does not relate to any independen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment which was executed on 09.03.2018. Furthermore, the Certificates dated 29.07.2016 and 12.08.2016 do not conform to the standard format in which the genuine Receipts of Payments were issued by the Corporate Debtor and also does not specify the "Mode of Payment" neither bear the official stamp or Company seal. 24. Further, the Certificate dated 17.04.2025 issued by the Chartered Accountants certifies that as per the books of accounts from the period of Financial Year 2015-16 to Financial Year 2022-23, M/s Alphabet Heights Pvt. Ltd. (formally known as Maple Realcon Private Limited) has not received any amount form Mr. Sanjeev Sangal, the Appellant herein. 25. Even otherwise, in a judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of The Correspondence, RBANMS Educational Institution v. B. Gunashekar & Anr., it was held that transaction of Rs. 2,00,000/- or more cannot be effected in cash payment. The relevant extract of the judgement in reproduced herein for ready reference: "However, when the Bill was passed, the permissible limit was capped under Rupees Two Lakhs, instead of the proposed Rupees Three Lakhs. When a suit is filed claiming Rs.75,00,000/- paid b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....estion the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors and the judicial mind of Ld. NLCT who have already approved the Resolution Plan. 27. The Appellant have preferred the present appeal challenging the Order dated 27.11.2024, passed by the Ld. NCLT in the matter titled Bindals Merchandise v. M/s Maple Realcon Pvt. Ltd., bearing CP (IB) No. 496/2018, without any specific cause of action being raised. The relevant part of the Order is reproduced herein below for easy reference: "The Ld. Counsels for the Applicants could raised a concern that if the dwelling units/flats claimed by them are disposed of before scrutiny is done by SRA, serious prejudice would be caused to them. They espoused that till the scrutiny is done by SRA, the flats claimed by them should be kept on hold and should not be disposed of. In view of rival submissions made by the Ld. Counsels for the parties, the present applications are disposed of with the direction that the Petitioner would approach the SRA within one week and the SRA would scrutinise the record of Corporate Debtor as also other relevant records and documents, including verification of report and would arrive at a conclusion regard....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng to Rs. 95,84,29,258/- by the Resolution Professional and in light of the numerous queries being received by the Claimants to the Respondents, the Respondents vide Letter dated 25.06.2020 sought clarification regarding the admission of claims from the Resolution Professional. In response thereto, the Resolution Professional, vide communication dated 28.06.2020, furnished a reply to the Respondent's aforesaid letter, thereby conveying certain pertinent facts and circumstances relating to the verification and admission of claims. 32. The Resolution Professional via its Letter dated 28.06.2020, informed the Respondents that the total claim filed by the Creditors during the CIRP amounting to Rs. 1,28,56,66,091/-were scrutinized by the Resolution Professional during the claim verification process. That from the total claim amount, a certain amount of Rs. 95,84,29,258/- was ascertained by the Resolution Professional as provisionally admitted based on the limited documents made available by the ex-management and the creditors themselves. Further, the remaining amount from the total claim filed amounting to a total of Rs. 32,72,36,833/- were kept under verification by the Resoluti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the best possible estimation made by the Resolution Professional, considering the limited availability of records due to the financial distress of the Corporate Debtor. It is a well-established principle that in insolvency proceedings, the records of a financially stressed entity may suffer from inconsistencies, data asymmetry, or even inaccuracies. That the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Deccan Value Investors L.P. & Anr. v. Dinkar Venkatasubramanian & Anr. 2024 SCC OnLine SC 804, has affirmed that the Resolution Professional is required to assess claims and provide information on a best-effort basis rather than an absolute standard of accuracy. The relevant excerpt of the judgement is reproduced herein below: "Records of the corporate debtor, who are in financial distress, may suffer from data asymmetry, debatable or even wrong data. Thus, the provision for transactional audit, etc., but this takes time and is not necessary before information memorandum or virtual data room is set up. Financial experts being aware, do tread with caution. Information memorandum is not to be tested applying "the true picture of risk" obligation, albeit as observed by the National Company La....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essing, verifying, and validating the claims in a fair and transparent manner, thereby preventing any wrongful or inflated claims from being admitted to the detriment of other stakeholders. This clause was introduced to facilitate an equitable and just settlement process. 39. The present appeal has been preferred by the Appellant and some other limited number of individuals have also preferred similar Appeals against the Respondent, while a substantial number of claimants have already had their claims duly settled by the Respondent. Notably, the claims of 61 individuals have been fully satisfied by the Respondent, amounting to a total sum of Rs.12,99,38,821/-, despite not filing their claims initially but whose payments were reflected in the accounts of Corporate Debtor. The claims were mutually settled by the SRA in bona fide manner, demonstrating the good faith intent of the Respondent in resolving such claims equitably. 40. In compliance with the directions of the Ld. NCLT. That vide Order dated 27.11.2024, passed by the Ld. NCLT, the Ld. NCLT has directed the SRA to conduct a thorough scrutiny of the records of the Corporate Debtor, along with all other relevant documents....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ution of a fresh Builder Buyer Agreement (BBA), subject only to verification of original documents (to check the mode and amount of payment). On this basis, the Respondent-SRA took over control of the Corporate Debtor. The Appellant is an unsecured financial creditor and its treatment is governed by the following verification clause which is leading to this dispute: 6th Unsecured Financial Creditors (consenting) The unsecured financial creditors are the homebuyers of the residential real estate project of MRPL, namely Misty Heights who would be given delivery of the flats purchased by them as per the Schedule given below. Towers A and B - 21 Months Towers D and E - 30 Months Tower C - 36 months However, the delivery of the flats shall be contingent upon the homebuyers paying the dues against their flats as per the construction linked payment schedule for the residential housing project of MRPL namely Misty Heights. Further, the Resolution Applicant shall be within his rights to verify the original documents, that is, original Builder Buyer Agreement and Payment Receipts for each flat within 60 days. The same shall be done to ascertain the mode of payment being made to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... **** IA-817/2024, IA-818/2024, IA-822/2024, IA-823/2024, IA-826/2024, IA-1929/2024, IA-2344/2024, IA-2703/2024, IA-3880/2024, New IA-5591/2024, New IA-5592/2024: The Ld. Counsel for the SRA produced before us a copy of order dated 25.11.2021, to espouse that in IA-4033/2021 which raised the identical issue this Tribunal remitted the matter to SRA for his consideration. The order passed in IA-4033/2021 reads thus: "ΙΑ-4033/2021: It is submitted by the Counsel for the Applicant that the Resolution Plan in the present matter has already been approved by this Adjudicating Authority on 20th February, 2020. The grievance of the Applicant is in regard to his claim vis-à-vis provision in the Resolution Plan. Let the Petitioner submit his grievance first to the Resolution Applicant which will consider and disposed of this same in accordance with the Resolution plan provision. Accordingly, the Petitioner is directed to approach the Resolution Applicant along with the present application, which will be treated as representation. The Resolution Applicant will dispose of the representation within 15 days. With this the application stands disposed o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Resolution Plan, including the verification clause therein, was duly placed before the Committee of Creditors and approved with the requisite majority in accordance with the provisions of the Code, 2016. The Appellant, being part of the CoC, casted his vote in favour of the said Resolution Plan. The Plan was thereafter approved by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority vide Order dated 20.02.2020, thereby attaining finality and becoming binding on all stakeholders under Section 31 of the Code, 2016. Thus, the Appellant cannot circumvent or dilute the verification clause forming an integral part of the approved Plan. Under the guise of seeking implementation of the Resolution Plan, the Appellant is attempting to question or reopen the terms of the Resolution Plan, which is impermissible in law once the Plan has received final approval from the Ld. NCLT and has attained binding force. 51. Respondent further claims that the purpose and intent of the 6th clause in the Resolution Plan was that, owing to lack of cooperation from the ex-management and paucity of records, the RP had provisionally admitted claims aggregating to Rs. 95.84 crores out of Rs. 128.56 crores, while keeping Rs.32.7....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o be implemented in a time bound manner, which the SRA has failed to do so. As per the terms and conditions of the resolution plan the Respondent-SRA had to verify original documents within 60 days which it has not done and maximum period of delivery of homes was 36 months, which has also not happened. Despite repeated enquiries by the appellant, the respondent has not done so and now challenging the authenticity of the documents of the Appellant. 54. We further note that in this case of the Appellant- Sanjeev Sanghal in CA (AT) (Ins) No. 2370 of 2024, the appellant had filed the claims timely (though in incorrect form but clearly attaching documents of allotment letter), allotment letter, payment receipts (though cash receipts) and furthermore the RP had accepted full claims and intimated about it to the Appellant, which has noted by us separately herein. Furthermore, Appellant's name is in the list of financial creditors/homebuyers at page 16 of APB at serial number 265 and against whom it is noted that nothing is pending verification. Can the 6th clause in the Resolution plan be interpreted in favour of the homebuyers or not? 55. It is claimed by the Appellant that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as the Resolution Plan has been drafted by the SRA in its own interests, if at all the clause is operable, applying the principles of contra proferentem, the same has to be interpreted in the favour of the homebuyer and within the scheme of the IBC. Furthermore, Appellant brings to our notice that permitting the SRA to judge and reject or admit claims, while not complying with their obligations would be strictly against the principles of natural justice i.e. nemo judex in causa sua. Appellant further claims that the SRA's argument goes in the teeth of this principle, because by this approach it can simply pick up some documents and refuse handover of flats purely in its own interest. 56. In the background of above analysis we find that as the appellant in this case had filed the claims timely along with allotment letter, payment receipts and furthermore the RP had accepted full claims and intimated about it to the Appellant, and furthermore, Appellant's name is in the list of financial creditors/homebuyers and against whom it is noted that nothing is pending verification, therefore, the conduct of the SRA to initially keep the claim of the Appellant pending and now questioning t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a new right to unilaterally alter the liabilities of the Corporate Debtor to their own benefit after a binding plan has been approved. In fact, specifically in a homebuyers' case, the primary obligation of a resolution applicant is to ensure the handover/delivery of the flats which could not be delivered by the Corporate Debtor prior to the CIRP. It is with this understanding that the SRA has filed the Resolution Plan. In the present case, the SRA seeks to escape this obligation despite knowing fully well that the Appellant's claim stood admitted. The Appellant's case has placed its reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the homebuyers case of Amit Nehra & Anr v. Pawan Kumar Garg & Ors 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1941, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court in identical circumstances has directed the SRA to transfer the flat to the homebuyer. In paragraphs 28 to 40, it has been held: *** "28. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced at the bar and perused the material placed on record. The central question which falls for our determination is whether the Appellants, being allottees of an apartment in the project IREO Rise (Gardenia), Moha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not filed any claim at all. The publication of the list of financial creditors is an act in discharge of a statutory duty by the Resolution Professional. It cannot be reduced to a meaningless formality. Learned Counsel for the Appellants has rightly placed reliance on Puneet Kaur v. K.V. Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., 2022 SCC Online NCLAT 245, wherein it was observed as follows: "......However, we are of the view that the claim of those homebuyers, who could not file their claims, but whose claims were reflected in the record of the corporate debtor, ought to have been included in the information memorandum and resolution applicant, ought to have taken note of the said liabilities and should have appropriately dealt with them in the resolution plan. Non-consideration of such claims, which are reflected from the record, leads to inequitable and unfair resolution as is seen in the present case. To mitigate the hardship of the appellant, we thus, are of the view that ends of justice would be met, if direction is issued to the resolution professional to submit the details of homebuyers, whose details are reflected in the records of the corporate debtor including their claims, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tted by the Resolution Professional and reflected in the list of financial creditors well before approval of the Plan by the Adjudicating Authority. To disregard such an admitted claim and confine the Appellants to the limited benefit under Clause 18.4(xi) is not to preserve the binding effect of the plan but to misapply it. Clause 18.4 itself draws a clear distinction between verified claims and belated or unverified claims; to obliterate that distinction would render the scheme otiose. Relegating bona fide allottees, who have paid substantial consideration years in advance, to the status of mere refund claimants runs contrary to the very object of the legislative framework. 38. The facts of the present case highlight the plight of individual homebuyers, who invest their life savings in the hope of securing a roof over their heads. The Appellants had paid nearly the entire sale consideration as far back as 2011. To deny them possession today, despite their claim having been duly verified and admitted, would inflict unfair and unwarranted prejudice. CONCLUSION AND DIRECTIONS 39. In light of the foregoing analysis and reasoning, the appeal merits acceptanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a statutory/ regulatory right be transferred to the SRA to be utilized in its own favour. Further, there is a bounden duty on the RP to verify the claim. There is no option or "provisional" verification as is sought to be argued by the SRA. In this regard, Regulation 14 of the CIRP Regulations states that: "14. Determination of amount of claim (1) Where the amount claimed by a creditor is not precise due to any contingency or other reason, the interim resolution professional or the resolution professional, as the case may be, shall make the best estimate of the amount of the claim based on the information available with him. (2) The interim resolution professional or the resolution professional, as the case may be, shall revise the amounts of claims admitted, including the estimates of claims made under subregulation (1), as soon as may be practicable, when he comes across additional information warranting such revision." 66. Appellant contends that only the RP had the power to revise the amounts of the admitted claims, not the SRA. This is a statutory/regulatory power given to the RP as an independent professional which cannot be transferred. Even if ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "164. The approval of the Adjudicating Authority under Section 31(1) of the IBC has the effect of making the Resolution Plan binding on all stakeholders. These stakeholders include the employees of the corporate debtor whose terms of employment would be governed by the Resolution Plan, the Central and State Governments who would receive their tax dues on the basis of the terms of the Resolution Plan and local authorities to whom dues are owed. These stakeholders are not direct participants in the CIRP but are bound by its consequence by virtue of the approval of the Resolution Plan, under Section 31(1) of the IBC. Section 31(1) ensures that the Resolution Plan becomes binding on all stakeholders after it is approved by the Adjudicating Authority. The language of Section 31(1) cannot be construed to mean that a Resolution Plan is indeterminate or open to withdrawal or modification until it is approved by the Adjudicating Authority or that it is not binding between the CoC and the successful Resolution Applicant." 167. Regulation 38(3) mandates that a Resolution Plan be feasible, viable and implementable with specific timelines. A Resolution Plan whose implementation can ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e timeline specified, thereby giving up its self-appointed right to do so. 70. Instead, we note that the SRA has simply taken over the assets of the Corporate Debtor from the year 2020 immediately upon approval of the Resolution Plan and taken benefit of the Corporate Debtor thereafter. At the same time the SRA gave a complete go-bye to the timelines for implementation in the Resolution Plan and never made any efforts to address creditor interests or satisfy the claims of homebuyers with the hope that some homebuyers would not approach the SRA or lose hope. It is only when the Appellant wrote an e-mail dated 16.07.2022 that the SRA suddenly requested for documents to be submitted. Even thereafter it is evident that despite the original BBA and Payment Receipts being shown to the SRA, it was making the Appellant go around in circles for several years. We find that not once was it alleged that the BBA and Payment Receipts are forged and fabricated as is now being sought to be argued before this Hon'ble Tribunal. 71. We also look into the claim of the Appellant that it has fully paid the claim for the flat and it has been admitted in full by the RP. The appellant brings to our n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....we direct that all bookings done through various collaborators in respect of the project being developed as "Misty Heights" over plot No. GH-01-SC-1 Sport City, Greater Noida, shall be consideration by the IRP on furnishing of appropriate documents i.e. payment receipts and Agreements." 74. Appellant brings to our notice that the above Order dated 26.09.2019 passed by the Ld. AA was not challenged by the RP in Appeal. Accordingly, SRA's arguments on books of accounts not reflecting payments, while completely false on merits, are no longer res integra because this issue has already been decided. The RP then filed a Report dated 12.10.2019 which enclosed a "Complete list of Committee Creditors" (containing the Appellant's fully verified claim at Sr. No. 265) and in paragraph 5 of the Report stated, without any reservations: "5. That it is submitted that the Resolution Professional has verified the claims received by him from the financial creditors of the class of homebuyers in accordance with the Order of this Hon'ble Tribunal dated 26.09.2019." 75. Appellant argues that it never needed to take benefit of the Order dated 26.09.2019 passed by the Ld. AA because its cla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... conveying significant information about the corporate debtor including its operations, financial statements, to the prospective resolution applicant and shall contain the following details of the corporate debtor- (a) assets and liabilities 7 [including contingent liabilities] with such description, as on the insolvency commencement date, as are generally necessary for ascertaining their values. Explanation: 'Description' includes the details such as date of acquisition, cost of acquisition, remaining useful life, identification number, depreciation charged, book value, 8 [geographical coordinates of fixed assets] and any other relevant details. (b) the latest annual financial statements; (c) audited financial statements of the corporate debtor for the last two financial years and provisional financial statements for the current financial year made up to a date not earlier than fourteen days from the date of the application; (d) a list of creditors containing the names of creditors, the amounts claimed by them, the amount of their claims admitted and the security interest, if any, in respect of such claims; (e) particulars of a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld have been produced by the SRA but what it consistently kept doing throughout the Appeal is suppressing this information and covering it up that the books of accounts do not record the name of the Appellant. Appellant further brings to our notice that when the ledger was produced, the SRA neither disputed it nor explained why it kept stating on oath that the Appellant's name was not reflected in the books of accounts. Instead, it started attacking the treatment accorded by the Corporate Debtor to the transaction in its books, which is not in control of the Appellant. Thus, we can conclude that books of accounts were available during the CIRP, the Appellant's transaction is reflected in the same (in whatever form), the RP correctly admitted the claim and the SRA failed to either carry out due diligence of the claims, or is now suppressing the books of accounts to escape its obligations to handover the Flat. Genuineness of payments and receipts 82. With respect to the payments and receipts of the Appellant, SRA has raised few issues that the payment receipts are not in the "standard format", the payment receipts do not specify the mode of payment and the Cash was not an accep....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the respondent to prove that no such amount was given. Only because documentary proof was not available, we find such view taken to be erroneous. A person who gives cash obviously would not be having any documentary proof per se. Sometimes there may be an occasion where even for a cash transaction, a receipt is taken, but absence of the same would not negate and disprove the stand that the cash transaction also took place between the parties" 84. Accordingly, merely because cash was used in this particular transaction in 2016 would not ipso facto negate its legal import in the peculiar facts of this case where the RP has admitted that such payments were made. Suspicious circumstances - Is SRA proxy of erstwhile promoters? 85. Appellant has also strongly argued that although not directly but the situation on the ground is that this is a classic case where the SRA is actually being run by the same group of persons as were running the Corporate Debtor. It also raises the issue that CIRP has been misused to specifically get rid of the debts of the Corporate Debtor. Only a sum of INR 6,00,00,000 has been infused by the SRA into the Corporate Debtor to take over the entire project....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g to our notice that Appellants have attempted to introduce completely irrelevant material through the present Application, not for the purpose of assisting this Hon'ble Tribunal but only to divert the scope of the Appeal, mischaracterise commercial transactions of the year 2015-16, and create a false narrative. Such material has no role whatsoever in the consideration of the issues arising in CA (AT)(Ins.) No. 109 of 2025. 88. Vehemently denying all allegations the Respondent has brought to our notice indeed there have been commercial transactions between the SRA and the corporate debtor and only Rupees 1.20 Crs and not Rs 10 crores as alleged by the appellant is the net amount standing between two of them. The respondent also denies that SRA is the mask of the ex-directors. It also brings to our notice that the resolution professional had satisfied itself that SRA is not a related party of the corporate debtor and the SRA had transparently disclosed all past transactions between itself and the corporate debtor in section 29A declaration. 89. At this stage we are not looking at other issues raised by the appellant with respect to the past dealings of the SRA with the Corpora....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ject named Misty Heights situated at Plot No. GH-01, Sector adjoining Techzone-IV, Sport City, Greater Noida for a total sum of Rs. 47,00,000 by execution of (i) a Builder Buyer Agreement dated 09.03.2018; (ii) two Payment Receipts dated 29.07.2016 [Rs. 22,00,000] and 12.08.2016 [Rs. 25,00,000] (Pg 63-64/Appeal Vol I) and (iii) a Letter dated 09.03.2018 issued by Mr B P Singh, the Authorized representative of the Corporate Debtor confirming receipt of full payment for the flat. 92. We find that the claim of the appellant was admitted by the RP to the full extent of Rs 47 lakhs on 1st December 2018. Furthermore, the name of the appellant exists in the list of the Committee of Creditors, which was filed before the Adjudicating Authority, and the name of the appellant was recorded as a financial creditor and homebuyer. We further find that the resolution plan dated 4 September 2019 was approved by the CoC and later on by the Adjudicating Authority. 93. All these materials were on record before the adjudicating authority. We agree with the contention of the appellant that this is not challenge to the resolution plan which has the clause for verification, but prayer to implement t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ionship with Mr. B.P. Singh, who has signed the documents on record and who has also signed the settlement deed. It is the responsibility of the SRA to now take care of the admitted liability of the home buyers (the appellants) in the resolution plan. 97. In short, we find that the appellant is a home buyer and has made full payment of Rs 47 lakhs and has a receipt thereof and has also allotment/builder agreement. Furthermore, the name of the appellant is in the list of FCs/Homebuyers prepared by the resolution professional, and the RP has accepted its claims to the fullest extent. This list was also placed before the adjudicating authority while approving the resolution plan. The SRA sat over the claims for almost six years, even though it had to decide the claim after scrutiny within 60 days as per the resolution plan. In this background we find it strange that at this stage, in the name of scrutiny using the sixth clause in the approved resolution plan, the SRA is not accepting the claim and is claiming it to be based on fraudulent and forged documents. 98. It was also brought to our notice by the appellant that as per the orders of the adjudicating authority, when they we....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his case even though he had admitted the claim of the Appellant to the full extent, but due to the verification clause, uncertainty exists. To avoid such situations, IBBI should take care that normally no such verification clause exists in the resolution plan, and even if it exists, the finalization of the claims should not be dependent on the Successful Resolution Applicant, who could be the ultimate beneficiary in rejecting the claims. Such finalization of claims and its verification should be done by the resolution professional. And as discussed earlier IBBI should bring about necessary clarifications in this regard. 101. In the above backdrop, we find that the adjudicating authority has erred in not admitting the appeal and we are inclined not to agree with its findings. Orders 102. We allow the Appeal and set aside the impugned order dated 27.11.2024 passed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority in I.A. No. 1929 of 2024 in C.P. (IB) No. 496/ND/2018 and also direct the Respondent to handover the title and physical possession of the allotted flat i.e. Unit No. B-0102, Tower - B, Area 1560 Sq. ft. in Misty Heights situated at Plot No. GH-01, Sector adjoining Techzone-IV, Spor....