Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2019 (10) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 1350 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor committed default in making repayment of its dues - existence of debt and dispute or not - Time Limitation. Time Limitation - contention of the Corporate Debtor that the Petition is hit by Law of Limitation has to be accepted in view of the fact that the date of the default mentioned in the petition is 01.04.2014, but this petition was filed on 03.07.2019, which is more than three years after the date of default - HELD THAT:- It is beneficial to refer the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on limitation in Insolvency & Bankruptcy Petitions, viz. B. K. Education Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Parag Gupta & Associates:[2018 (10) TMI 777 - SUPREME COURT], Vashdeo R Bhujwani v. Abhyudaya Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr. (2019 SCC OnLine SC 1159) and Sagar Sharma v. Phoenix ARC Limited MANU/SC/1357/2019 : , wherein it was held that Article 137 of the Limitation Act will apply to the proceedings wherein three years is the limitation period. Hence, the Petition is liable to be dismissed as hit by limitation. This is a case where the Petitioner purchased five units from different projects of the Corporate Debtor. The Petitioner got substantial discount from the Corporate Debtor for some of the units. Further, the Petitioner has received a compensation of ₹ 15,00,000/- from the Corporate Debtor for the delay in giving possession of the Unit in this case - Since the Petitioner has purchased five units from different projects of the Corporate Debtor, the petitioner is a speculative investor to get maximum advantage of the booming real estate market at that time, and when the real estate market is in difficult time, he wants to come out of the clutches of liability staring on him by shifting the liability on the Corporate Debtor. Admittedly, the Flat is ready for possession but the Petitioner is adamant on taking refund. The interest of the Petitioner seems to be something other than the Flat. However, we refrain from making any comment on the motives of the Petitioner. In a project like this where hundreds of flat buyers are involved, when compensation of this magnitude is acceded as demanded or CIRP is ordered, we are afraid that it may lead to utter chaos in the real estate market in the country and it will affect the real estate sector wholly and a situation may arise that no investor will be forthcoming to invest in real estate sector - Admittedly the flat was ready and completion certificate was obtained on 13.04.18. We are of the view that petitions of this nature have to be dealt with in a macro economic perspective also, failing which it will scupper the prospects of real estate sector. Petition dismissed.
|