2018 (8) TMI 661 - SUPREME COURT

Protecting the interests of home buyers in projects floated by Jaypee Infratech Limited (JIL) - IDBI Bank Limited instituted a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC) against JIL (CP (IB) 77/ALB/2017)) before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at its Bench at Allahabad. The bank sought the initiation of a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against JIL.

Held that:- in the absence of a statutory recognition of the position of the home buyers as financial creditors, the law did not allow for real and substantive entitlements to them in the CoC. These statutory entitlements have been brought in by the Ordinance in order to recognise the vital interests of the home buyers in a real estate project and to allow them a statutory status in the insolvency resolution process. Unfortunately by the time that the Ordinance came into being on 6 June 2018, the period of 270 days had expired; the resolution plan of Lakshdeep was rejected and the IRP informed NCLT that no resolution plan had been approved within the extended period of 270 days on 12 May 2018.

Having regard to the material change which has been brought about by the amendment of the IBC by the Ordinance and the fact that this Court has been in seisin of the proceedings to ensure that the home buyers are protected, we are of the view that it is but appropriate and to do complete justice to secure the interests of all concerned that the CIRP should be revived and CoC reconstituted as per the amended provisions to include the home buyers.

In the facts of the present case, recourse to the power under Article 142 would be warranted to render complete justice. Parliament has undoubtedly provided a period of 180 days and an extended period of 90 days to complete the process. But in the present case a peculiar situation has arisen as a result of which the status of the home buyers which had not been recognised prior to 6 June 2018 has now been expressly recognised as a result of the amending Ordinance.

A new CoC should be constituted in accordance with the amended provisions of the IBC to enforce the statutory status of the allottees as financial creditors. We also clarify that apart from the three bidders whose bids were found to be eligible by the IRP, it would be open to the IRP to invite fresh bids to facilitate a wider field of choice before the CoC.

IRP permitted to invite fresh expressions of interest for the submission of resolution plans by applicants, in addition to the three short-listed bidders whose bids or, as the case may be, revised bids may also be considered.