Case: ANAND MURTI Vs. SONI INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED &amp; ANR

Private Limited vide its order dated 22.11.2019 for the CIRP got admitted. 11. That suspended Director has preferred an Appeal before Honble NCLAT and Honble NCLAT vide it order dated 19.12.2019 were pleased to grant stay on CIRP. 12. That as per the direction of the Honble NCLAT, i have filed the settlement terms/Resolution Plan with all details pertaining how this project will be managed to be completed with funds planning and repayment to all Creditors. 13. That I say that I will complete the stage wise construction within 6 months to 15 months (+/- 3 Months) in phased manner from the date of Order. Particulars Tower Time in Months (+/-- 3 Months) Stage--I T8--T12 Within 6--9 months Stage--II T1--T4 Within 12 months Stage--III T5--T7 Within 15 months 14. That I say, I had committed in open court and accordingly arranged Rs 10 Crore to start the project immediately without any delay and I will ensure this will be started within 15--30 days. 15. That I have already agreed in my Resolution plan that the Cost of the Flat will not be escalated and agreed to honor the BBA signed by the previous management. 16. That as per the data before the LD IRP only 9 home buyers out of 452 Home Buyers wanted the refund and in my Resolution Plan I have agreed to refund the amount after completion of the project of Phase--1. 17. That I have stated all relevant data and computation in details in my Resolution Plan that how the funds will be utilized and how the construction work can be completed in time. 18. That I have stated in my last modified resolution plan that SBI Cap Vetures Ltd has already shown interest for further Loan of 100 Crore to me. 19. That as per the direction of Honble NCLAT I have attended the meeting with the Representative of the Home Buyers and I have already accepted and agreed to Incorporate the suggestions and objections of the Home Buyers to the Resolution Plan and the same has been recorded by the LD IRP in the Minutes of the Meeting dated 23.10.2021. 20. That I have also given my consent to make a team of 5 person, 2 from buyer side and 2 from management side and will be monitored by Ld IRP 21. That this affidavit to the additional documents in the present Civil Appeal have been read by me and are found true and correct to my knowledge and belief. 22. That the Annexures are true copies of their respective originals. 23. That the facts stated in the above affidavit are true and correct to my personal knowledge and belief. 24. That No part of the same is false and nothing material have been concealed there from. DEPONENT VERIFICATION I, the above named deponent do hereby verify that the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to my knowledge and belief which I believe to be true. No part of the same is false and nothing material has been concealed there from. Verified at New Delhi, on this 27th day of December, 2021. DEPONENT. 20. The Promoter, Shri Kashi Nath Shukla has also filed an undertaking, thereby undertaking to return the money with interest at the rate of 6% per annum of seven applicants in I.A. No.11358 of 2022 (for impleadment) in the present appeal, who were objecting to the Settlement Plan submitted by the appellant. The same is taken on record and marked X for identification. 21. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case, we find that it will be in the interest of the home--buyers if the appellant/promoter is permitted to complete the housing project. The salient features of the undertaking given on affidavit are as under: (a) That the project will be completed stage-wise within a period of 6 months to 15 months (+/- 3 months) in a phased manner; (b) That the promoter has arranged an amount of Rs. 10 crores to start the project immediately without any delay and that he will ensure that the project would be started within 15--30 days; (c) That the cost of the flat will not be escalated and that the promoter is agreeable to honour the BBA signed by the previous management; (d) That SBI Cap Ventures Ltd. has already shown interest for further loan of Rs.100 crore; (e) That the promoter has given his consent to make a team of 5 persons, 2 from home-buyers side and 2 from the management side and that the entire process will be monitored by the IRP. 22. Taking into consideration the salient features of the undertaking given on affidavit by the Promoter, Shri Kashi Nath Shukla and the fact that there are only seven out of the 452 home--buyers, who opposed the Settlement Plan, we find that it will rather be in the interest of the home--buyers that the appellant/promoter is permitted to complete the project as undertaken by him. It is pertinent to note that he has agreed that the cost of the flat will not be escalated. He has also given the time line within which the project would be completed. Not only this, but he has also undertaken to refund the amount paid by the seven objectors, if they so desire. He has further agreed that there shall be a team of 5 persons, 2 from the home-buyers side and 2 from the management side and that the entire process shall be monitored by the IRP. 23. We find that there is every possibility that if the CIRP is permitted, the cost that the home--buyers will have to pay, would be much higher, inasmuch as the offer made by the resolution applicants could be after taking into consideration the price of escalation, etc. As against this, the Promoter has filed a specific undertaking specifying therein that the cost of the flat would not be escalated and that he would honour the BBA signed by the previous management.

Decision (1 = appeal accepted, 0 = rejected): 1

Explanation:
1[ds]18. It could thus be seen that though a meeting of various stakeholders was conducted on 23rd October, 2021 in pursuance to the directions issued by the NCLAT dated 29th September, 2021 and in which meeting most of the issues stood resolved, the NCLAT has failed to take into consideration the minutes of the said meeting dated 23rd October, 2021. Not only that, but the NCLAT has also not taken into consideration the Revised Status Report dated 3rd November, 2021 submitted by the IRP.20. The Promoter, Shri Kashi Nath Shukla has also filed an undertaking, thereby undertaking to return the money with interest at the rate of 6% per annum of seven applicants in I.A. No.11358 of 2022 (for impleadment) in the present appeal, who were objecting to the Settlement Plan submitted by the appellant. The same is taken on record and marked X for identification.21. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case, we find that it will be in the interest of the home--buyers if the appellant/promoter is permitted to complete the housing project. The salient features of the undertaking given on affidavit are as under:(a) That the project will be completed stage-wise within a period of 6 months to 15 months (+/- 3 months) in a phased manner;(b) That the promoter has arranged an amount of Rs. 10 crores to start the project immediately without any delay and that he will ensure that the project would be started within 15--30 days;(c) That the cost of the flat will not be escalated and that the promoter is agreeable to honour the BBA signed by the previous management;(d) That SBI Cap Ventures Ltd. has already shown interest for further loan of Rs.100 crore;(e) That the promoter has given his consent to make a team of 5 persons, 2 from home-buyers side and 2 from the management side and that the entire process will be monitored by the IRP.22. Taking into consideration the salient features of the undertaking given on affidavit by the Promoter, Shri Kashi Nath Shukla and the fact that there are only seven out of the 452 home--buyers, who opposed the Settlement Plan, we find that it will rather be in the interest of the home--buyers that the appellant/promoter is permitted to complete the project as undertaken by him. It is pertinent to note that he has agreed that the cost of the flat will not be escalated. He has also given the time line within which the project would be completed. Not only this, but he has also undertaken to refund the amount paid by the seven objectors, if they so desire. He has further agreed that there shall be a team of 5 persons, 2 from the home-buyers side and 2 from the management side and that the entire process shall be monitored by the IRP.23. We find that there is every possibility that if the CIRP is permitted, the cost that the home--buyers will have to pay, would be much higher, inasmuch as the offer made by the resolution applicants could be after taking into consideration the price of escalation, etc. As against this, the Promoter has filed a specific undertaking specifying therein that the cost of the flat would not be escalated and that he would honour the BBA signed by the previous management.