VIJAY MOHAN AND RAJUL MOHAN vs SUPERTECH LIMITED

Due to administrative exigency,  the matter is adjourned to 08.07.2024 for the purpose as already fixed.

Due to administrative exigency, the matter is adjourned to 01.07.2024 for the purpose as already fixed.

Since the IRP - respondent No.1  who stepped the shoes of Promoters as per orders of the Hon’ble NCLT, did not timely complied  with the directions of the Authority dated 12.01.2024 which was to be complied within 15 days, the Authority  hereby imposes  a penalty of Rs. One Lakh as per provision of section 63 of the Act, 2016.    Shri Hitesh Goel - IRP present  in person stated that no separate books of account of each project were being maintained  uptil 25 March 2022  i.e.  the date when the moratorium was imposed.   Further stated that even now no separate books  of account is being  maintained for each project , only MIS is being prepared  and hence they have not filed QPRs.  IRP further stated that he has taken the charge of company Supertech  Ltd. on  as is where is basis and since no separate balance sheets of each project  used to be prepared,  hence,  he could not do the compliances of the directions which were pending for compliance prior to his  appointment  as  IRP of the company and further since June, 2022 he has tried to maintain separate bank account of each project of the company. Further stated that since the registration of  most of Gurugram projects have already been elapsed  and  renewal of the same/extension of the same is still pending. Although they had moved an application  No.1172 of 2022 dated 06.02.2023 for extension which was rejected by the authority on 14.11.2023 on account of non-compliances of various deficiencies pointed out by the Authority and non-payment of fee for extension payable to RERA, as per  copy of the acknowledgement  being filed today in the registry of the authority. Further stated that assets and liabilities of M/s Sarv Realtors and M/s  DSC Estate  Developers  after imposition of moratorium have not been transferred to the management of those  companies as he is unable to do so the same as moratorium is going  on the whole company of Supertech Ltd. and there is no direction w.r.t the same from Hon’ble NCLT. Further stated that  they have enclosed with the affidavit Annexure-J from page 82 to 89 which is details of transfer entries dated 31.03.2020 passed on to M/s Sarv Realtors and M/s DSC Estate Developers.  IRP further stated that there was an interim order from Hon’ble NCLAT Delhi after submissions of resolution proposal by the ex-promoters of the company i.e. Supertech Ltd. which is still pending for decision and next date of hearing is 03.05.2024 and once that proposal gets through/approved by NCLT  only then further process of revalidation of licence and renewal of RERA registration shall be taken up.   Shri Mohit Arora director of M/s Sarv Realtors and M/s  DSC Estate  Developers is present in person and filed authorization letter and copy of DIN and counsel of M/s Sarv Realtos Ltd. and M/s DSC Estate Developers have filed Power of Attorney.  Mr.Mohit Arora agreed and stated that they had taken over  M/s Sarv Realtors and M/s  DSC Estate  Developers   from M/s Supertech Limited and now they are running the projects and  bank accounts of  these are being managed  by them.   The counsels for the complainant (s) states that since the IRP has not filed the QPR and has not updated the status of the project,  they are unable to know the factual position of the project.   Further stated that  since the IRP entered into the shoes of promoter in June,  2022  and  had been assigned the power of supervision of each and every project of Supertech Ltd. and he must do the compliances.   The counsels for the complainants further stated that IRP  as well as management of M/s Sarv Realtors and M/s  DSC Estate  Developers  are not disclosing the exact status of the projects Hues and Azalia. Further stated that as per affidavit filed by IRP, if the projects Hues and Azalia already stands transferred to M/s Sarv Realtors and M/s  DSC Estate  Developers on 31.03.2020 then why M/s Sarv Realtors and M/s  DSC Estate  Developers are not doing compliances, The Authority must direct them to do the same in the interest of the allottees.   The counsel for M/s Sarv Realtors and M/s  DSC Estate  Developers  and Mr.Mohit Arora states at bar that they have received all the assets and liabilities of the project “Hues and Azalia” in March 2020.   Shri Rohit Arora - the counsel on behalf of M/s Sarv Realtors and M/s  DSC Estate  Developers further brought attention of the authority towards para No.5 page 79 of the order of the authority dated 29.11.2019 which is reproduced as under:-   (v) All the  assets and liabilities including customer receipts and project loans of whatsoever nature, in the Project “Supertech Hues and Azalia” in the name of Supertech Ltd be shifted to Sarv Realtors Pvt Ltd/DSC and others. However,  even after  the rectification, Supertech Ltd.  will continue to remain jointly responsible for the units marketed and sold by it and shall be severally responsible if Sarv Realtors Pvt. Ltd/DSC and others fail to discharge its obligations towards the allottees.   IRP of the company stated that the director of M/s Sarv Realtors and M/s  DSC Estate  Developers will file the exact status  of the project as they have already committed during the proceedings that they have taken over the project on 31.03.2020 from M/s Supertech Ltd.  The Authority hereby directs the authorized director of M/s Sarv Realtors and M/s DSC Estates to   clarify the exact status of QPRs and updated  status of registration of the project Hues and Azalia in the shape of affidavit and that they shall  apply  for registration /extension of these projects within next 20 days .  In case they have not filed the reply to the complaint cases, in which they are impleaded,  they will have to file the reply within 15 days.   Part arguments heard. Matter be put up before the full bench on 27.05.2024 at 3.00 PM for further arguments.

In view of orders of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, NCLAT and affidavit submitted by IRP ON 27.09.2023 in matters listed on 06.10.2023, it is clear that the CIR Process is continuing against the entire Corporate Debtor company, as a result of which the Moratorium imposed upon the entire Corporate Debtor company is also continuing and the continuation of any proceedings whatsoever, against the Corporate Debtor in any form is prohibited as per provisions of IBC Act, 2016. In view of the same, the matters are adjourned to 19.04.2024 for further proceedings.

The counsel for the respondent  and the IRP present  in person as per directions of the authority state that they have already filed the affidavit as well as status of construction of various projects, as per  the directions of authority  vide its order dated 25.08.2023.  The affidavit was filed on 27.09.2023  and the construction status report was filed on 03.10.2023. The copy of the same has been handed over to all the concerned parties still if counsel of any concerned party has not received the same, the counsel for the respondent is hereby ready to  hand over the copy of the same to the concerned complainant or his counsel. IRP present  in person stated that moratorium is applicable on all the projects of Supertech Ltd. and the same had been granted by Hon’ble NCLT New Delhi on its order dated 25.03.2022. Further stated that an appeal was filed against this order by the Suspending Directors before Hon’ble NCLAT in appeal No.406 of 2022 which is still pending before the Hon’ble NCLAT.  However an interim order was passed in that appeal stating that  CoC was restricted to ECO village-II and all other projects of Supertech Ltd. were to be constructed under the supervision of IRP alongwith the assistance of ex-management employees and workmen vide its order dated 10.06.2022. Further on 12.09.2022 the Hon’ble NCLAT Delhi further passed an order “CIRP order has not been stayed, the moratorium is continuing”.  Further, stated that the orders dated 10.06.2022  of NCLAT  was challenged before Hon’ble SC which was heard  by the Hon’ble SC and an interim order was issued upholding the orders dated 10.06.2022 of NCLAT. This interim order was passed by the Hon’ble SC on 11.05.2023 and it was further listed for hearing on 24.08.2023 but on that date due to any reason, the matter could not be taken up and the next date of hearing is still not notified.  Further stated that the NCLAT is continuously hearing the appeal and the next date of hearing is 19.10.2023.  Further stated that Hon’ble NCLAT vide its order dated 5.07.2023 categorically stated after taking into consideration the orders of Hon’ble SC that   “In view of the fact that it is IRP who is under control of the entire CIRP in all projects,  it is necessary that the status report which is submitted in the Court should be put on the website of the Supertech so that it can be assessed by everyone”. Further the counsel for the complainant in CR No.1730 of 2023  and CR No.2144/2021,  424/2022 and some other complaints states that project Azalia and Hues are not covered in the list of the projects in which moratorium is continuing,  hence those should be taken up separately. Further IRP present in person states that  he has already admitted the claims of various allottees from the projects Azalia and Hues as treating them  as contingent liability of the corporate debtor i.e. Supertech Ltd.  The counsel for the complainants states that they are not aware about the claims being asked for by the IRP of Supertech in case of the projects of Azalia and Hues.  The counsel for the respondent and IRP present  in person states that the claim of projects Azalia and Hues were admitted by him after the order dated 14.10.2022 of Hon’ble NCLAT. IRP present in person further states that they are still accepting the claims of allottees of Azalia and Hues for the purpose of verification. The authority hereby directs IRP to submit a copy of the claims admitted by him within a period of 15 days and the same may be uploaded  on the website of the authority also. Complainants are free to file the response to the affidavit filed by IRP within 15 days. IRP to be present before the authority and co-operate as and when required just to safeguard interest of the allottees and subject to final directions of the Hon’ble NCLAT and Hon’ble SC. Arguments heard. Since the matter is sub-judice before the NCLAT and Hon’ble SC it is being adjourned to 12.01.2024 for further proceedings.

On the last date of hearing, it was directed to IRP to be personally present on the next date of  hearing and up date the authority about the project status since his appointment as IRP and about the compliances he has done since his appointment as IRP of the said company i.e. Supertech Limited. The counsel of the respondent stated that since the moratorium is going on, the cases of allottees filed  individually or severally may be kept in abeyance till moratorium is going on.  The counsel for the complainant states that the project of complainant-allottee is not under  IBC proceedings and Hon’ble Supreme Court has very well clarified vide its order dated 11.05.2023  that all other projects other than ECO-II shall be on going projects and rather further clarified that it is being done keeping in view the unwanted harassment which may happen to the homebuyers if the entire company is put under moratorium.  Respondent was directed to file an affidavit within a period of one month regarding   the clarification about the status of the project vide its order dated 25.08.2023 in CR No.2677/2020 and others in  which the respondent has not yet filed and stated that  they have still 4 days to file the same and shall be filing the same within the given time.   The authority hereby again directs to file the affidavit and update the status as desired in proceedings dated 25.08.2023 regarding all the other projects M/s Supertech Ltd. other than ECO- village II  on which the moratorium  is there, failing which authority shall be bound to proceed for penal action against the IRP.Authority vide its order dated 07.04.2023 had directed the IRP to appear personally and to clarify the position of the company and the status of various projects of the company as he is advised by NCLT to supervise all projects of Supertech along with existing management. IRP did not comply with directions of the authority. He is hereby further directed to appear personally on 06.10.2023  to clarify the exact status of various projects of Supertech Ltd.On the basis of request of counsel of respondent,  the matters already listed on 24.11.2023  are being  preponed for 06.10.2023.Matter to come up on 06.10.2023 for further proceedings.

The  counsel for the complainant states that IRP is not coming forward to give the detailed status and progress of the project whereas they are issuing demands to the allottees.The counsel for the respondent states that as far as my knowledge goes,   IRP is not raising any such demand. Still I will have to clarify from the IRP regarding this and he will  seek instructions from the IRP  with regard to that. Further the counsel for the respondent states that he is not aware whether the respondent is complying with the compliances of RERA or not.  For that also, he will seek instructions from the IRP and reply on the next date of hearing. Looking towards the above said facts and in the interest of allottees, it is hereby directed to IRP to be personally present on the next date of  hearing and up date the authority about the project status since his appointment as IRP and about the compliances he has done since his appointment as IRP of the said company i.e. Supertech Limited. The counsel of the respondent states that since the moratorium is going on the cases of allottees filed  individually or severally may be kept in abeyance till moratorium is going on. Authority is of the considered view that it is not going to pass any adverse order during moratorium but still in the interest of allottees, it is hereby directed to IRP to provide and update about the progress and status of the project to the Authority and status of the compliance being done.  He should appear personally on next date of hearing and apprise the authority about the entire facts as IRP stepped into the shoes of management of the above said company on 25.03.2022. Matter to come up on  22.09.2023 for further proceedings.

Vide orders dated 25.03.2022, NCLT New Delhi initiated CIRP against the respondent i.e., M/s Supertech Limited and appointed Mr. Hitesh Goel as IRP for the corporate debtor and declared moratorium as per section 14 of IBC. It led to filing an appeal in NCLAT against that order by Mr. R.K. Arora, one of the suspended Director. That order was stayed by NCLAT and constitution of CoC was stayed and observed that IRP may constituted the CoC only in relation to project ECO village-Il of the corporate debtor and that appeal is pending for 12.08.2022.  Further an application dated 26.07.2022 from Mr. Hitesh Goel IRP has been received stating therein that though all the projects of the corporate debtor apart from ECO village - II would be kept as ongoing project, but the construction of the other projects would continue with overall supervision of IRP with the assistance of ex-management, its employees and workmen. So, the imposition of moratorium under section 14 of IBC would continue and proceedings of all the cases listed before the authority be adjourned sine die. But plea raised in this regard is devoid of merit. While passing order dated 25.03.2022 though NCLT initiated CIRP against the corporate debtor, but that order was stayed and modified vide orders dated 26.07.2022 by NCLAT by observing that the construction of all other projects shall continue with over all supervision of IRP with the assistance of its ex-management, its employees and workmen. Though clarification w.r.t this order is pending for 28.09.2022 before NCLAT but IRP would be treated as a promoter for all intents and purposes except for ECO village-Il against whom CIRP has been initiated and is pending.      The authority has already requested to the Additional AG Haryana to examine whether as per reading of order dated 25.03.2022 and order dated 10.06.2022, moratorium in terms of Section 14 of the IBC is declared only against ECO village-Il project or in respect of all other projects of the corporate debtor i.e., M/s Supertech Limited. The requisite advice is still awaited. The counsel for the respondent had produced a copy of order passed by Hon’ble NCDRC wherein various complaints were listed and NCDRC after perusal of the order passed by NCLAT has deferred the matter for awaiting clarification from NCLAT regarding applicability of moratorium on project of M/s Supertech other than ECO village – 2. The counsel has further submitted that IRP has also moved an application before NCLAT for clarification and the case is fixed for 28.09.2022.   The counsel for the respondent has produced a copy of orders dated 26.08.2022 in case titled as EA/141/2021 and other bunch matters were heard in NCDRC vide which the NCDRC has deferred the matter till 13.12.2022 keeping in view the NCLAT orders dated 25.03.2022.   Now vide order dated 12.09.2022, the NCLAT has clarified that “the CIRP order has not been stayed. The Moratorium is continuing.            On 30.09.2022 one of the complainant had moved an application stating therein that letters from M/s Supertech in  Hues project had been received and demanded the amount otherwise they threaten to cancel the unit and forfeit the amount which he has already paid since 2014 and placed a copy of email dated 22.09.2022 sent by the Supertech Ltd. to clear the outstanding dues on 05.10.2022. On failure they shall be compelled to cancel the unit. The counsel for the complainant had requested that M/s Supertech cannot demand the outstanding amount in case the moratorium is continuing and IRP has been appointed. In view of the facts and circumstances above,  it is directed that IRP shall be present on the next date of hearing to explain the detailed status of the moratorium imposed upon M/s Supertech Ltd. and to explain whether M/s Supertech Ltd. can demand the outstanding amount in case  moratorium is continuing on whole of the company. Further the authority shall also explore for engaging the services of an expert in NCLT matters to protect the rights and interest of allottees. Matter to come up on 07.04.2023  for further proceedings.

On 25.03.2022, the NCLT inter alia initiated CIRP against the corporate debtor (M/s Supertech Limited), and appointed Mr. Hitesh Goel as IRP for the corporate debtor and declared moratorium as per section 14 of IBC.                   Mr. R.K. Arora the suspended director of the corporate debtor filed an appeal in NCLAT against the above mentioned NCLT order. The appeal no. 406 of 2022 was heard on multiple dates and Hon’ble NCLAT continued the stay on constitution of COC till 10.06.2022 and modified the CoC stay order to the extent that the IRP may constitute the CoC only in relation to Project Eco village -II of the corporate debtor.                 Vide documents submitted on 26.07.2022 by the respondent in the authority, it was submitted by the respondent that the order dated 10.06.2022 of NCLAT only modified the CoC stay order and not the insolvency admission order dated 25.03.2022 and hence moratorium declared under section 14 of IBC shall continue. Section 14 – Moratorium of IBC, 2016 Subject to provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3), on the insolvency commencement date, the Adjudicating Authority shall by order declare moratorium for prohibiting all of the following, namely:-- (a) the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority; (b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein; (c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its property including any action under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002); (d) the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where such property is occupied by or in the possession of the corporate debtor.   The appeal titled as Ram Kishore Arora, Suspended Director of Supertech Ltd. Vs. Union Bank of India and Anr. bearing appeal no. 406 of 2022 which is pending in NCLAT is adjourned to 12.08.2022. Arguments heard on the point whether the moratorium is only on a particular project ECO village - II project or all the projects of the M/s Supertech Ltd because as per para 25 of the modification order,  the construction of all other project shall continue with all over  supervision of the IRP with the assistance of ex-management and its employee and workmen.           Matter to come up on 15.11.2022 for further proceedings.

The District Bar Association Gurugram vide resolution No.323 dated 27.05.2022 has informed that Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh vide Notification No.117 dated 09.05.2022 declared that summer vacation will be observed from 01.06.2022 to 30.6.2022 and requested not to list the cases between 01.06.2022 to 30.06.2022. In view of the above, the case is adjourned to 01.08.2022 for the purpose as already fixed.

In view  of judgment dated 11.11.2021 in title- M/s Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt Ltd. Vs State of UP & Ors. Etc. passed by the  Apex Court, this forum has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the complaint in hands.File be transferred to the Authority.  Reader is directed to send the file immediately.

Pleadings are complete. 2.                        To come on 08.12.2021 for arguments.

Due to increase in the Covid-19 cases in and around the area of the Authority, the case is not being taken up for hearing. Hence, as per directions of the Hon’ble Authority, it is being adjourned to 10.08.2021 for the proceedings already fixed. 2.         Both the parties be informed accordingly through e-mail.

In pursuance to notice, both the parties put in appearance through their respective counsel. 2.           Copy of written reply  supplied to the complainant through their counsel. Let  formal reply be filed before the Registry within 10 days. 3.           List for arguments on 29.04.2021.

THE MATTER IS ADJOURNED TO 23.02.2021

DUE TO PREVAILING COVID-19 PANDEMIC, THE MATTER IS ADJOURNED TO 21.10.2020

DUE TO PANDEMIC FEAR, THE MATTER IS ADJOURNED TO 31.08.2020

Due to Lock down, the matter is adjourned to 01.07.2020

The complaint  has been received on transfer from the learned Authority. 2.  This complaint relates to refund of the amount deposited with the respondent  besides other charges. 3.      Though the complaint has been filed in form CRA but in view of transfer of the same from the learned Authority, it is ordered  to be treated to have been filed in form CAO before this forum.  Both the parties through their counsel  did not object to the same. So, it is ordered accordingly. 4.     Reply, if any, be filed  on or before  01.04.2020 with an advance copy to  the other side and otherwise the same would not be  taken on record. 5.    Let the matter be put up for arguments on 15.04.2020

THE CASE IS ADJOURNED TO 26.02.2020

During the course of hearing, it  is observed that in view of the amendment in Rule 28 of the Haryana Real Estate (Regulation &  Development) Amendment Rules, 2019,  the complaint has to be filed in form CRA. However,  the same has not been filed despite service of notice. The complaint in form CRA be filed within 7 days with an advance  copy to the respondent through speed post/e-mail address and proof of service be also filed.The respondent on receipt of copy of the complaint in form CRA shall file reply within 7 days thereafter with a copy to the complainant through speed post/e-mail address with proof of service. Respondent is also directed to  submit a copy of lay out plan alongwith the reply by clearly marking the unit of the complainant. In case, compliance is not made by either of the parties, as stated above, necessary legal consequences including dismissal of complaint/striking off defence will follow. The matter is adjourned to 08.01.2020 for arguments.

THE CASE IS ADJOURNED TO 15.11.2019

THE CASE IS ADJOURNED TO 04.10.2019

THE CASE IS ADJOURNED TO 21.08.2019

CASE IS ADJOURNED TO 29.05.2019