[Under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and

Bankruptcy Code, r/w Rule 11 of the National

Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016]

1. GAUTAM SHAH

2. TRUPTI GAUTAM SHAH

Tower A, Flat No. 2702

Beaumonde, Appasaheb Marathe Marg

Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400060.

…Applicants

V/s

MR. DINESH KUMAR DEORA

RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL OF

M/S SNEHANJALI AND S.B. DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED

205, 2nd Floor, Nadiadwala Market

Near SM Lal, Poddar Road

Malad (East), Mumbai – 400097. ...Respondent

IN THE MATTER OF:

MR. SANTOSH SHETTY AND ORS. …Financial Creditor

V/s

M/S SNEHANJALI AND S.B. DEVELOPERS

PRIVATE LIMITED ...Corporate Debtor

Pronounced: 03.01.2025

CORAM:

HON’BLE SHRI K. R. SAJI KUMAR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

HON’BLE SHRI SANJIV DUTT, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

Appearances: Hybrid Applicant: Adv. Tanmay Kelkar i/b Adv. Aniruth Purusothaman Respondent: Adv. Harsh Seth, Adv. Yash Dhruva, Adv. Niyati Merchant i/b MDP Legal

ORDER

IA (I.B.C.) No. 4982/MB/2024 [PER: K. R. SAJI KUMAR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)]

1. BACKGROUND

1.1 This Interlocutory Application, IA (I.B.C.) No. 4982/MB/2024 (IA) was filed on

06.09.2024 by Mr. Gautam Shah and Ms. Trupti Gautam Shah, the Applicants under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) seeking directions against Mr. Dinesh Kumar Deora, the Resolution Professional (RP/Respondent) regarding partial admission of their claims in the CIRP of Snehanjali and S.B. Developers Pvt. Ltd., i.e., the Corporate Debtor (CD), which is undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The claim, according to the Applicants, arose on account of a Credit Note dated 19.10.2020 issued by the erstwhile Partner of the CD for Rs.27,22,000/-. Both the Applicants claim that they are homebuyers/Financial Creditors (FCs) in “O2 Project” in Sion, which was being developed by the CD.

1.2 The case of the Applicants is that they entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the CD on 03.03.2014 for purchase of Flat No. D-503 on the 5^th Floor [71.62 sq. mtrs. carpet area (770.92 sq. ft.), 118.45 sq. mtrs. Saleable area (1275 sq. ft.)] for lumpsum consideration of Rs.6,000/- per sq. ft. of saleable area. The Applicants had already paid Rs.10,00,000/- (as recorded in Clause 2(i) of the MoU).

1.3 We admitted C.P.(IB) No.1046/MB/2023 filed by FC against the CD, under Section 7 of the IBC, on 07.03.2024, thereby initiating CIRP of the CD and the Respondent was appointed as the IRP.

1.4 Pursuant to the Public Announcement on 09.03.2024, the Applicants submitted claim of Rs.63,69,400/- to the Respondent vide email dated 22.03.2024, in FORM CA in terms of Regulation 8A of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016. The break-up of claim of Rs. 63,69,400/- was (i) Principal amount of Rs. 34,00,000/-; (ii) Stamp Duty of Rs.2,17,400/-; (iii)

Registration Fee of Rs. 30,000/-; and (iv) Credit Note of Rs. 27,22,000/-.

1.5 The Respondent vide email dated 28.03.2024 acknowledged the receipt of the claim of the Applicants and requested them to produce certain documents such as, reason for the developer's credit note; a copy of Power of Attorney (POA) of the person authorised to issue Credit Note. Pending production of these documents, their claim was put on hold.

1.6 Subsequently, Applicant No.1 sent information and the documents to the Respondent along with a copy of bank statements showing debits by email dated 02.04.2024. It was stated that the Credit Note was issued as compensation for the delay in delivery of possession by the CD and that they do not have POA authorising issuance of the Credit Note by the CD. However, the email trail of employees of the Ahuja/Fosun (erstwhile partners) with the Applicants’ real estate broker viz. Mr. Himanshu Parikh were attached for proof of the Credit Note.

1.7 The Respondent informed Applicant No. 1, vide email dated 08.04.2024, that a claim of Rs.34,00,000/- was admitted; however, the claim on the Credit Note was rejected by the Respondent.

1.8 The Respondent by email dated 22.05.2024, informed Applicant No.1