Back
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Praveen Gupta, Judicial Member, Ashish Verma, Technical Member
SNIGDHA PARAKH – Appellant
Versus
BHUVAN MADAN – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application seeks possession despite rera refund order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. allottees remain financial creditors entitled to possession. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. rera refund order final; possession not permissible. (Para 6) |
| 4. rera refund decree crystallizes rights excluding possession. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. resolution plan exit policy governs refund decree holders. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. application dismissed; confined to refund relief. (Para 17) |
ORDER
1. This present application is filed on 16.04.2025, by Snigdha Parakh and Arvind Parikh (hereinafter collectively referred as “Applicants”) under section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) read with Rule 11 of National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 against the Resolution Professional (hereinafter referred as “Respondent/RP”) of Jaiprakash Associates Limited i.e., Corporate Debtor. The Applicant inter alia seeks the following prayers:
“(1) Pass an order allowing the present application and direct the Respondent to correctly admit the claim of the Applicants for the Possession of their Unit; and;
(2) Pass an order allowing the present application and direct the Respondent to issue the offer of
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
