The Court can exercise powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to permit withdrawal of CIRP proceedings, considering the larger interest and the IBC's objective to balance the interests of home buyers and prevent abuse of the Code.

JUDGMENT :

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. Interlocutory Application No. 105732/2021 (for impleadment) is allowed in terms of the prayer made and they are ordered to be impleaded as respondents in the instant appeal.

1.1 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 09.11.2020 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NCLAT/Appellate Authority’) in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1380 of 2019, by which the Appellate Authority has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the appellant herein-Promoter/Majority Shareholder of the Corporate Debtor-Jasmine Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. and has confirmed the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NCLT/Adjudicating Authority’) in admitting the petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short ‘IBC’) the appellant-Promoter/Majority Shareholder of the Corporate Debtor has preferred the present appeal.

2. That respondent no. 4 herein-Corporate Debtor-Jasmine Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. had come out with a Gurgaon based housing project, namely, Krrish Provence Estate (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Project’). That respondent no. 4 herein-Corporate Debtor could not complete the project even after a period of eight years. Therefore, respondent nos. 1 to 3 herein (hereinafter referred to as the ‘original applicants’) who were the home buyers preferred Section 7 application before the Adjudicating Authority/NCLT, Delhi being CP No. 1722/ND/2018 seeking initiation of CIRP against respondent no. 4-Corporate Debtor. That the original applicants sought refund of an amount of Rs. 6,93,02,755/- due to an inordinate delay in the completion of the project and failure to handover possession within the stipulated time. The said application was filed on 06.12.2018, i.e. prior to the amendment to Section 7 of the IBC, which now permits 100 or 10% of the home buyers/allottees to apply under Section 7 of the IBC.

2.1 That the NCLT/Adjudicating Authority admitted Section 7 application on 28.11.2019 and appointed the Interim Resolution Professional (for short ‘IRP’) and declared a moratorium. That the appellant herein challenged the order of admission of Section 7 application before the NCLAT/Appellate Authority being CA (AT) (Insolvency) 1380 of 2019. It appears that during the hearing before the NCLAT/Appellate Authority, the appellant herein tried to settle the matter with the original applicants, however, the settlement did not go through. That by the impugned judgment and order, the NCLAT has dismissed the said appeal and has upheld the admission order and directed commencement of CIRP.

2.2 The IRP issued the public announcement on 10.11.2020 and constituted the Committee of Creditors (for short ‘COC’) on 23.11.2020. In the meantime, the appellant preferred the present appeal. By order dated 03.12.2020, this Court, while issuing notice in the appeal, stayed the operation and implementation of the impugned order, subject to the appellant depositing the amount of Rs. 2,75,55,186/- plus interest at the rate of 6% per annum in the Registry of this Court within two weeks from that date. It is reported that the appellant had deposited an amount of Rs. 3,36,02,000/- on 17.12.2020 with the Registry of this Court, which has been invested in a Fixed Deposit Receipt, which is to mature on 9.3.2022.

2.3 Krrish Provence Flat Buyers Association had filed a caveat before this Court apprehending that if any order is passed in the present proceedings, it may affect them as home buyers. Three other home buyers, namely, Sanjiv Puri, Akshat Seth and Kaustav Mukherjee have preferred I.A. No. 105732 of 2021 for impleadment.

2.4 The present appeal was adjourned from time to time on the ground that the dispute between the appellant and respondent Nos. 1 to 3 herein (original applicants) is being settled and that the appellant/Corporate Debtor is prepared to complete the project within a perio