9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 1253X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ash Srivastava & Ms. Santha Smruthi, Advs. for R11. Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ravi Shankar Nanda, Ms. Madhurima Sarangi & Mr. Varun Kumar, Advs. for R12 & 13. Mr. Nalin Kohli, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Shruti Aggarwal, Ms. Kanika Singhal & Ms. Vijeta Singh, Advs. for IRP. ORDER PER CM APPL. 9251/2025 1. This application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ["CPC"], is moved at the behest of respondent No. 4/ Greenopolis Welfare Confederation ["GWC"] seeking the following reliefs: "a. Pass necessary directions to the authorities / investigating agencies to act in conformity of the binding judicial orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the other judicial forums (Ld. NCLT / this Hon'ble Court) in relation to Greenopolis project and shall not entertain any complaint / case which seeks to reagitate issues which have already been conclusively decided by the judicial forums by rejection of similar issues / allegations in other proceedings; b. Pass necessary directions / orders to Orris Infrastructure Pvt Ltd to immediately and forthwith handover the possession of flats / units in Phase-I of the Greenopolis Project to the persons who paid monies to Orris and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... We permit the writ-petitioner (OIPL) to move the NCLT by way of a formal application, to be filed within one week, for reconsideration of order dated 15.04.2021 and, in particular, the grievance that it would not be open to the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) to deal with the escrow account created by the High Court. The NCLT would also decide all other issues including as to whether the proceedings under Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA Act) and orders passed therein will have any bearing on the proceedings initiated before the NCLT under IBC. All contentions in that regard can be considered by the NCLT on its own merits and in accordance with law. We direct the NCLT to ensure that the proposed application to be filed by the writ petitioner-OIPL is decided expeditiously, preferably within two weeks from the date of presentation/filing, and until such time status quo with regard to the escrow account, referred to above, be maintained subject to above. However, the NCLT may for reasons to be recorded issue specific directions as considered necessary, even when the application is pending. In view of the above arrangement, nothing remains for considerat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or" and not that of a "Developer or Promoter" as defined under the definition of promoter. Thus, the Corporate Debtor has got no right, title & interest in the said project and also have no right to dispose-of the property or sell any of the units as well. Although, Ld. Counsel for the RP of the Corporate Debtor relied upon citation Rajendra K Bhutta V. MHADA (2020) 13 SCC 208, but the said citation is not helpful to the present RP because of the fact that the Corporate Debtor was license developer of land belonging to the Authority MHADA and Corporate Debtor was in occupation of land in the capacity of the "license developer" of the land owned by State Authority, whereas in the present matter, the Corporate Debtor though entered into development agreement with the Orris Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., but the statutory compliances under the Act, 1975 were not meted out and never get changed the statutory license in its favour accordingly, it vest with no consequential rights in the project. x x x 76. From the bare perusal of Explanation to Section 18, it is apparent that even if the property is in the possession of the Corporate Debtor, but the same belongs to third party, such like ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation proceedings. Sections 25 (1) and 25 (2) (b) reads as follows This shows that wherever the corporate tor has to exercise rights in judicial, quasi-judicial proceedings, the resolution professional cannot short-circuit the same and bring a claim before NCLT taking advantage of Section 60 (5) a) Therefore in the light of the story scheme as culled out from various provisions of the IBC 2016 it is clear that wherever the corporate debtor has to exercise a right that falls outside the purviews of the IBC 2016 especially in the realm of the public law, they cannot, through the resolution professional, take a bypass and go before NCLT for the enforcement of such a right. b) In fact the resolution professional in this case appears to have understood this legal position correctly, in the initial stages. This is why when the Government of Karnataka did not grant the benefit of deemed extension, even after the expiry of the lease on 25-5-2018, the resolution professional moved the High Court by way of a writ petition in WP No. 23075 of 2018. The prayer made in WP No. 23075 of 2018 was for a declaration that the mining lease should be deemed to be valid up to 31-3-2020. If NCLT was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ructed in three phases, approximately 512 flats are ready for possession and occupation by homebuyers. Orris has expressed its readiness and willingness to offer about 350 flats to homebuyers who have made direct payments to it. It was vehemently contended that no homebuyer who paid TCSPL is entitled to any share in the flats which have been constructed by Orris. 10. Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Senior Counsel for Orris, submitted that the order dated 03.10.2023 was passed by HRERA while the order of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ["NCLAT"] was still in operation. It was thus urged that only admitted list of allottees pertains to Orris, and the homebuyers who paid directly to TCSPL must pursue their claims before the NCLT. It was vehemently urged that the Orris is obligated to offer possession of fully constructed flats in Phase-I of the project exclusively to its allottees. 11. Opposing the instant application, Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayanan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for GWA, urged that the scope and ambit of the present petition are limited to the reliefs sought by the petitioner concerning action against the erring Builders/Contractors under Chapter XIV of the Comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ope of CIRP Proceedings concerning TCSPL. 15. Additionally, the attempt by GWA to put breaks on reliefs which are sought by the applicant/GWC in the instant application cannot be countenanced in law for the fact that apparently it is Orris that has completed the construction of 512 flats in Phase-1, which has nothing to do with TCSPL. Moreover, in light of the order dated 19.11.2924 passed by the Supreme Court, the order dated 29.03.2022 passed by the NCLT stands revived. Resultantly, the constructed flats constitute the property/assets of Orris, not TCSPL. Accordingly, with respect to the application of GWC, it would be just, proper, and logical that the interest of the 512 home buyers, who stand to benefit from the allotment and possession of completed units by Orris, should be the paramount consideration at this stage. 16. Undoubtedly, this category of homebuyers has invested their hard-earned money in the Greenopolis Project by making payments to Orris. Many of them may be residing on lease, while others may have borrowed home loans and are paying interest on them. Therefore, it is essential that, for the sake of these legitimate homebuyers, there should be no delay due to fl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s dated 07.12.2022 and 03.10.2023. These orders, however, do not survive after the revival of the NCLT proceedings, pursuant to the directions of the Supreme Court dated 19.11.2024, wherein HRERA was also a party. Consequently the order of the Supreme Court effectively revives the previous NCLT order dated 29.03.2022. 21. As brought to the fore, the learned NCLT has already passed a detailed order dated 17.12.2024 and has not extended the status quo concerning the allotment of any completed residential flats/units to the home buyers whose cause is being espoused by the present applicant/GWC. 22. The sum result of the aforesaid discussion is that there is no legal impediment in allowing handing over of possession of 512 completed flats in terms of occupancy certificate issued on 01.10.2024 by Orris to its allottees, who are members of the applicant/GWC. 23. Accordingly, the present application is allowed. M/s. Orris Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. is hereby directed to hand over the possession of the flats/residential units in Phase-1 of the Greenopolis Project to the eligible home buyers who have made payments towards the sale consideration to Orris. A detailed list of the home buyers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
