SC refuses to intervene in the assets of Supertech promoters, saying home buyers can.
The Supreme Court on Friday rejected the plea of Supertech Home buyers seeking restraint of former directors / promoters of real estate firms from disclosing their personal assets and providing details of their personal assets, bank accounts and other assets.
However, the Supreme Court has given homebuyers the freedom to seek redress before the National Company Law Appeals Tribunal (NCLAT).
Although Supertech was declared bankrupt by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), the NCLAT last month suspended the formation of the Committee of Lenders (CoC) under bankruptcy proceedings as it sought time to negotiate with real estate developer banks.
A bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachur, refusing to intervene, directed the home buyers to approach the NCLAT, where the matter is now pending. “Once the IBC process starts, you have to follow the rigors,” it says.
About 104 home buyers were moved by the SFIO to investigate the company’s affairs and submit a report on the removal of funds by these former promoters, as well as instruct the government to form an appropriate committee to look into their complaints.
For Supertech’s project-based bankruptcy, home buyers have stated that they have a limited role to play in the role of unsecured financial lenders and that the interests of secured financial lenders are given priority over them.
Home buyers sought protection of their fundamental rights, saying that Supertech’s sole purpose in accepting liability was to avoid all its claims and liabilities against them and to leave them high and dry without any remedy under the law. “Also, it is clear that crores of rupees have been raised by Supertech through home buyers and financial institutions Ram Kishore Aurora and Mohit Aurora who are directors / promoters of Supertech and thus trying to flee the country. A number of FIRs have been filed against these directors for their illegal and criminal activities, ”the petition said.
Home buyers told the SC that the union’s acceptance of loans and liabilities to Bank of India’s claim strengthens the collusion between secured financial lenders and real estate firms whose sole interest is not to sell assets and complete projects for recovery. The amount due and their payable.
The NCLT, despite being aware that bankruptcy has been sought from a real estate developer, should order the bankruptcy according to the project so that even during the CIRP, each project can proceed at its own pace towards the completion of the project, the petition was filed through Council Pride, Goel said.
Leave a Reply