National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
Devendra Singh vs Homebuyers Of Sidhartha Buildhome Pvt. ... on 2 May, 2025
Author: Ashok Bhushan
Bench: Ashok Bhushan
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
I.A. No. 7577 of 2024
in
Comp App. (AT) (Ins) No. 791 of 2023
IN THE MATTER OF:
Devendra Singh ...Appellant(s)
Versus
Homebuyers of Sidhartha Buildhome ...Respondent(s)
Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Present:
For Appellant : Mr. Alok Dhir, Mr. Kanishk Khetan, Advocates.
For Respondents : Mr. Monish Surendran, Advocate for R-1.
Mr. Sanjay Bajaj, Mr. Shivam Takkar and Mr. Rajat
Prakash, Advocates for R-3.
Mr. Sumant Batra, Mr. Sarthak Bhandari, Mr. Shiv
Mangal Sharma, Mr. Saurabh Rajpal, Mr. Abhishek
Sharma, Advocates for R-4.
With
Contempt Case (AT) No. 8 of 2024
in
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 791 of 2023
IN THE MATTER OF:
Deepak Kumar Goyal ...Applicant(s)
Versus
Sidharth Chauhan &Anr. ...Contemnor(s)/Respondent(s)
Present:
For Applicant : Mr. Alok Dhir, Mr. Kanishk Khetan, Advocates
Mr. Deepak Kumar Goyal, RP in person.
For : Mr. Sumant Batra, Mr. Sarthak Bhandari, Mr.
Contemnor/Respondents Shiv Mangal Sharma, Mr. Saurabh Rajpal, Mr.
Abhishek Sharma, Advocates for contemnors.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode) 02.05.2025: I.A. No. 7577 of 2024- This is an application filed for clarification by Resolution Professional of Judgment dated 16.02.2024 passed in CA (AT) (Ins) No. 1194 of 2023 with CA (AT) (Ins) No. 791 of 2023 with CA (AT) (Ins) No. 982 of 2023.
2. Ld. Counsel for the Applicant submits that this Tribunal by Judgment dated 16.02.2024 has set aside the order dated 24.05.2023 passed by Adjudicating Authority allowing Section 12A application which directions have been issued in paragraph 37.
3. It is further submitted that this Tribunal noticed that one of the project namely project NCR Green is almost complete hence direction was issued to keep the project out of CIRP.
4. It is submitted that some directions issued in paragraph 37, 38, 40 requires certain clarification with regard to revival of the CIRP of the CD.
5. It is submitted that the Respondents to the appeal i.e. Suspended Directors have taken stand that CIRP is confined only to the one project i.e. Estella Project which is not correct and the RP was entitled to carry out the CIRP of the CD.
6. Shri Sumant Batra Ld. Counsel appearing for Suspended Director submits that Suspended Director has never taken any stand that the CIRP of the entire CD has not been revived only stand was that the project NCR Green has been kept out of the CIRP. The Suspended Directors are entitled to retain the documents and material with the said project.
7. We have also heard the Ld. Counsel for Respondent No. 3/Punjab & Sind Bank. Shri Bajaj has appeared for Respondent-3.
8. We have heard the submissions of Ld. Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
9. Paragraph 37, 38 of the Judgment following has been held:
"37. We having already held that the order dated 24.05.2023 is unsustainable. The proposal under Section 12A having not been approved by 90% vote share of the CoC, the order dated 24.05.2023 has to be set aside reviving the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor".
38. Learned Counsel for the Respondent has relied on judgment of this Tribunal in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 926 of 2019- "Flat Buyers Association Winter Hills vs. Umang Realtech Private Limited through IRP & Ors." where this Tribunal has directed for reverse CIRP in facts and circumstances of the said case. We are also of the view that in the present case, the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor be revived and be confined to the Estella Project. Let the Resolution Professional constitute the CoC for the Estella Project. Taking in the CoC the homebuyers of Estella Project, the Financial Creditors- Punjab National Bank and Punjab & Sind Bank shall also be part of the CoC. We permit the Resolution Professional to issue fresh Form-G with regard to Estella Project and complete the CIRP process within a period of 90 days from the date of issuance of Form G".
10. When the order passed by adjudicating authority (24.05.2023) allowing 12A application has been set aside, the natural consequence of setting aside the order is that to revive the CIRP as have been directed in paragraph 37. We however clarify that CIRP is revived with regard to CD as a whole and is not confined to Estella Project only as was observed in paragraph 38 of the Judgment.
11. In view of the fact that project NCR Green was kept out of the CIRP that was only for the purpose of completion and handing over of the project by promoters.
12. We are of the view that application need to be disposed of with the above clarification.
Contempt Case (AT) No. 8 of 2024 This contempt application has been filed alleging contempt of orders dated 16.02.2024 passed in CA (AT) (Ins) No. 1194 of 2023 with CA (AT) (Ins) No. 791 of 2023 with CA (AT) (Ins) No. 982 of 2023.
2. By an order of date 02.05.2025 IA No. 7577 of 2024 have clarified our Judgment dated 16.02.2024.
3. Ld. Counsel appearing for Respondent has submitted that Respondent has never given any impression that CIRP does not relate to the entire CD.
4. In view of the aforesaid, we see no reason to continue the contempt application.
5. Contempt application closed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson [Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) sr/md