An independent CIRP for a separate project of a corporate debtor cannot be initiated through an interlocutory application within an existing CIRP; such action must comply with the procedural requirements of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

ORDER

Common Facts:

1. The Corporate Debtor was admitted to CIRP under Section 9 I&B Code on 06.06.2022, for a default of INR 5,80,49,773/- committed under a contract with respect to the Signature Block for project Shalom Canopy Crest.

2. According to the pleadings filed in I.A. 253/2022, Corporate Debtor has the following projects:

3. Vide an order dated 09.06.2023 passed in I.A. Nos. 253 & 257 of 2022 the CIRP was restricted to the Project Canopy Signature only. The relevant para of the order is reproduced below:

“We have carefully considered the facts and circumstances and the above mentioned judgments of Hon’ble NCLAT. It is noticed from the order under section 9 of the IBC dated 06.06.2022 in CP(IB) No. 21/BB/2020; that the contract agreement was between the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor for the projects called the “Signature Block” and “Community Service Block” of Shalom Canopy Crest. Hence, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the CIRP initiated by this Tribunal vide its order dated 06.06.2022, should be interpreted and read in relation to the Project Canopy Signature only and not in other projects which are separate at different places of corporate debtor, so that CIRP in question initiated by the Adjudicating Authority, would be concluded in terms of extant provisions of Code.

Accordingly, the RP is directed to take appropriate action in accordance with extant provisions of Code and the Rules made thereunder and to confine the CIRP in respect of the Corporate Debtor to Canopy Signature Project only. Therefore, the I.A No. 253/2022 is hereby allowed. However, this order shall not preclude the applicant from pursuing other remedies in accordance with law, if so advised”

Now we take up the applications that have been heard, one by one:

I.A. No. 203/ 2023:

1. This Application has been filed by the landowners with prayers:

a. To allow the instant Application by granting permission to the Applicants herein to be a party to the instant Proceedings in Company Petition (I.B) No. 21/BB/2020 as an Intervenor or as the Third Party Respondent;

b. To Direct the Resolution Professional to exclude the Application Schedule Property (Shalom Canopy Crest) from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process in Company Petition (I.B) No. 21/BB/2020.

c. To Direct the Resolution Professional to amend/rectify the Expression of Interest for submission of Resolution Plan circulated as per Annexure T by including the status of the Application Schedule Property as enumerated supra by the instant Applicants;

2. The Applicants have sought to intervene in the main Company Petition without limiting their prayer to any specific Interlocutory Application. The main petition having already been admitted, the Applicants have failed to demonstrate, either in law or on facts, how their presence is necessary for effective adjudication of the issues involved, so as to justify their impleadment in all the present and future proceedings arising therefrom.

3. Further, with respect to the prayer seeking exclusion of the Schedule Property, namely Shalom Canopy Crest from the ambit of the CIRP, it is observed that the CIRP was initiated on the basis of a contract relating to the Signature Block of Shalom Canopy Crest project, the records also reflect that the same project has been consistently referred to as Canopy Crest Signature in the pleadings. Vide order dated 09.06.2023, the ongoing CIRP has already been restricted to the Project Canopy Crest Signature alone, out of