ANJALI RATHI AND OTHERS versus TODAY HOMES & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS

Citation: [2021] 9 S.C.R. 152 · Decided: 08-09-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
152
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 9 S.C.R.
ANJALI RATHI AND OTHERS
v.
TODAY HOMES & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.
AND OTHERS
(SLP (C) No. 12150 of 2019)
SEPTEMBER 8, 2021
[DR DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, VIKRAM NATH
AND HIMA KOHLI, JJ.]
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: s.14 – Petitioners
are home buyers in a group housing project – Possession of
apartments were not handed as per the agreement – Petitioners filed
consumer complaint before National Commission (NCDRC) –
NCDRC directed refund of money with interest – Execution
proceedings – First respondent challenged the order of NCDRC
before High Court and stay was granted in favour of first respondent
– Pending execution, proceedings were initiated against the first
respondent before NCLT by operational creditor – Adjudicating
Authority admitted s.9 petition following which the corporate
insolvency resolution process was initiated and a moratorium was
declared under s.14 of the IBC – This order of NCLT resulted in
filing of special leave petition by certain other homebuyers with
grievance that application filed for initiation of corporate
insolvency against the first respondent was merely to stall the refund
of the amount due to the homebuyers in terms of order of  NCDRC
– Petitioners lodged their claims before the Resolution Professional
– CoC approved the Resolution Plan which was submitted by the
consortium of homebuyers – Application was filed by the Resolution
Professional for approval of the Resolution Plan before the
Adjudicatory Authority and some objections were received – The
proceedings are now pending before the Adjudicating Authority,
awaiting its approval under s.31(1) of the IBC – If the petitioners
have any objections to the Resolution Plan, they are to submit them
before the Adjudicating Authority – NCLT is directed to ensure that
the application for approval is disposed of expeditiously – Since
the Resolution Plan is still to be approved by the Adjudicating
Authority under the provisions of s.31(1) of the IBC, at this stage, it
is held not appropriate to issue a direction to attach  personal
[2021] 9 S.C.R. 152
152
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
153
properties of the promoters – After the Resolution Plan is approved
under the provisions of s.31(1), consequences emanating from the
statutory provision would ensue to the benefit of the home buyers –
Further, since the moratorium declared in respect of the first
respondent continues to operate under s.14 of the IBC, no new
proceedings can be undertaken or pending ones continued against
the Corporate Debtor – Petitioners would not be prevented by the
moratorium under s.14 of the IBC from initiating proceedings against
the promoters of the first respondent in relation to honoring the
settlements reached before this Court – However, this Court cannot
issue such a direction relying on a Resolution Plan which is still
pending for approval before an Adjudicating Authority.
Disposing of the special leave petitions and appeal, the
Court
HELD: 1. The conspectus of facts before this Court reveals
that the petitioners have participated in the proceedings before
the RP and later, the CoC. The Resolution Plan which has been
submitted by the consortium of home buyers stands approved by
the CoC and the proceedings are now pending before the
Adjudicating Authority, awaiting its approval under Section 31(1)
of the IBC. If the petitioners have any objections to the Resolution
Plan, they are to submit them before the Adjudicating Authority.
The NCLT is directed to ensure that the application for approval
is disposed of expeditiously and preferably within a period of six
weeks form the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.[Para
12][159-G-H; 160-A]
2. The petitioners urged that this Court should at the
present stage direct that the personal properties of the promoters
be attached in view of the provisions contained in the Resolution
Plan which have been extracted earlier. The Resolution Plan is
still to be approved by the Adjudicating Authority under the
provisions of Section 31(1) of the IBC. Hence, at this stage, when
the Resolution Plan awaits approval, it would not be appropriate
for this Court to issue a direction of that nature. After the
Resolution Plan is approved under the provisions of Section 31(1),
consequences emanating from the statutory provision would
ensue to the benefit of the home buyers. Further, since the
ANJALI RATHI AND ORS. v. TODAY HOMES & INFRASTRUCTURE
PVT. LTD. AND ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.