The Tribunal affirmed the right of homebuyers to change authorized representatives based on majority votes under IBBI regulations.

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL

COURT-V, MUMBAI BENCH

111. IA/4610/2025 IA/4635/2025 IA/4636/2025 IA/4643/2025 C.P.

(IB)/2946(MB)2019

IN THE MATTER OF

Bank of India

VS

Wadhwa Buildcon LLP

U/s 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

Order Delivered on 09.10.2025

CORAM:

SH. MOHAN PRASAD TIWARI SH. CHARANJEET SINGH GULATI

MEMBER (J) MEMBER (T)

Appearance through VC/Physical/Hybrid Mode:

For the Applicant: Adv. Maulik Chokshi (VC)

For the Respondent:

_____________________________________________________________________

ORDER

IA/4610/2025, IA/4635/2025 & IA/4636/2025: This is the IA filed under Section 66 by the RP making 4 parties as respondents. Respondent No. 3 is the Bank who has given loan to the Corporate Debtor and Respondent No. 4 is the Auditor. No justified reasons are conversed by the Ld. Counsel for the RP for making them party and there are no specific reliefs under Section 66 sought against them. Accordingly, the RP is directed to look into the matter and amend the Memo of Parties and the prayers appropriately.

List this IA accordingly for further consideration on 09.12.2025.

IA/4643/2025: This IA has been filed by the RP against 3 Respondents. It is seen from the prayer clause that the prayers are relating to seeking certain disclosure of information on Affidavit by erstwhile RP (IRP) and seeking reference of the conduct of the IRP/RP to IBBI. We are not convinced that such prayer could be made in the IA before us. Accordingly, at this point in time we are not inclined to issue notice and direct

the RP to be present before us on the next occasion either physically or through VC.

List this IA accordingly for further consideration on 09.12.2025. sd/- sd/-

CHARANJEET SINGH GULATI MOHAN PRASAD TIWARI Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)

//Arjun//

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL COURT-V, MUMBAI BENCH

213. IA/3118/2025 IA/2730/2025 IA/5706/2024 IA/113/2025 IA/4175/2025 C.P.

(IB)/2946(MB)2019 IN THE MATTER OF Bank of India VS Wadhwa Buildcon LLP U/s 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Order Delivered on 09.10.2025 CORAM:

SH. MOHAN PRASAD TIWARI SH. CHARANJEET SINGH GULATI MEMBER (J) MEMBER (T)

Appearance through VC/Physical/Hybrid Mode:

For the Petitioner:

For the Respondent: Adv. Adeel Parkar (VC) (in IA 2730 of 2025)

_____________________________________________________________________

ORDER

IA/2730/2025: This IA has been filed by the RP seeking following prayers:

a) This Hon’ble Tribunal be please to allow to replace the Respondent from the position of the AR of the homebuyers.;

b) This Hon’ble Tribunal be please to appoint Mr. Anand Pande as the authorized representative of the homebuyers that of the corporate debtor.;

c) Such other orders or further orders, as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant has taken us to the enabling provision of Regulation

16A (3A), (3B) and (3C) and has submitted that resolution has been passed by the class of home buyers of Wadhwa Buildcon LLP to appoint Mr. Anand Pravin Pande Insolvency professional bearing Registration No. (Reg. No. IBBI/IPA- 003/ICAI-N-

00374/2021-2022/13914) as the authorized representative of the class of home buyers in terms of the above said regulations with the fees prescribed under Regulation 16(8) to represent them in the COC. It is also submitted that Mr. Anand Praveen Pande was voted to represent the Home buyers in class as creditors with 83% voting and accordingly, the present AR should be replaced by Mr. Anand Pravin Pande.

Per Contra, Ld. Counsel for the present AR submitting the background of the case contends that the current RP is doing this on account of personal vendetta and that even the list of home buyers which have been enclosed by the Applicant by way of their Additional Affidavit dated 12.08.2025, is not sacrosanct and further the voting percentage power allotted to each of the home buyers as ‘one’ is not correct. He submits that such voting should be in accordance with the percentage that such home buy