Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Prashant Kumar, JJ
Sequel Buildcon Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Prashant Kumar, J.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
| S.No. | HEADING | Page nos. |
| 1 | Facts of the case | 02-14 |
| 2 | Arguments on behalf of petitioner | 14-20 |
| 3 | Arguments on behalf of respondents | 21-28 |
| 4 | Insolvency proceeding | 28-29 |
| 5 | Reverse CIRP is not applicable & Piercing of Corporate Veil | 29-31 |
| 6 | Reverse piercing of Corporate Veil | 32-33 |
| 7 | Non-development of the sports facilities | 34 |
| 8 | Interest of Homebuyers | 34-35 |
| 9 | Notices for payment of instalments | 35 |
| 10 | Change in shareholding of various companies | 35-40 |
| 11 | Rejoinder arguments on behalf of the petitioner | 41-43 |
| 12 | Analysis by the Court | 43 |
| 13 | A. Scheme-2010-2011 for development of Sports City in NOIDA | 43-44 |
| 14 | B.Allotment to a Consortium & Sub-division | 44-47 |
| 15 | C. Insolvency | 47-48 |
| 16 | D. Reverse Insolvency | 48-50 |
| 17 | E. Lifting of Corporate Veil | 50-54 |
| 18 | F. Implementation of Prevention of Money Laundering Act | 54-55 |
| 19 | G. Fraud | 56-58 |
| 20 | H. Doctrine of Public Trust | 58-59 |
| 21 | I. Connivance | 59-62 |
| 22 | J. Interest of the Homebuyers | 62-64 |
| 23 | K. High Court’s interference | 66 |
| 24 | L. Conclusion | 66-67 |
| 25 | M. Effect on Consortium when a Member of the Consortium goes into insolvency | 68-69 |
1. Heard Sri Anil Tiwari, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Shikhar Kaushal and Sri Anuj Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, lea
The court emphasized that reverse CIRP cannot be used to evade liabilities, and the interests of homebuyers must be prioritized in insolvency proceedings.
The court emphasized that insolvency proceedings should not be exploited to evade liabilities, confirming the necessity to protect homebuyers' interests and investigate corporate fraud.
The court emphasized the need to pierce the corporate veil to hold individuals accountable for fraud, asserting judicial authority to intervene in administrative decisions when public interest is com....
The court emphasized the need for accountability in public contracts, allowing judicial review to ensure fairness and public interest, while directing a CBI inquiry into irregularities in the Sports ....
A lead member of a consortium who opts out lacks locus standi to challenge the actions of the authority regarding project delays and cannot claim damages.
CIRP initiated by homebuyers of one real estate project against developer must be confined to that project only, not extended corporate-wide, to protect other projects and stakeholders.
Resolution Plan – Inertia on part of GNIDA and its failure to protect interests of home/office space buyers, apart from its own interests, clearly disentitles it from levying penal interest/penal cha....
The court upheld the initiation of insolvency proceedings against two linked corporate debtors, affirming that the required threshold of financial creditors was satisfied at the time of the petition'....
CIRP initiated under Section 7 by allottees of one real estate project must be confined to that project only, not extending to other projects of the developer, upholding debt/default but protecting d....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
