In the matter of Sare Gurugram Private Limited

IN THE MATTER OF: M/s ASSET CARE AND RECONSTRUCTION ENTERPRISES LIMITED …Financial Creditor VERSUS M/s SARE GURUGRAM PRIVATE LIMITED … Corporate Debtor AND 1. IN THE MATTER OF IA 2690/2023: Under Section 60 (5) r/w Section 31 of IBC, 2016, objecting the Resolution Plan Mr. MAHENDRA SINGH BHATI …Applicant

2. IN THE MATTER OF IA 3503/2023: Under Section 60 (5) r/w Section 31 of IBC, 2016, objecting the Resolution Plan Mr. ABHISHEK SINGHAL …Applicant VERSUS

IA- 2690(PB)/2023, 3503(PB)/2023, 3505(PB)/2023, 3506(PB)/2023, 3507(PB)/2023 in CP-(IB)-300(PB) of 2020

Mr. AJIT JAIN Resolution Professional of Sare Gurugram Private Limited …Respondent No. 1 MONITORING AGENCY OF SGPL …Respondent No. 2 3. IN THE MATTER OF IA 3505/2023: Under Section 60 (5) r/w Section 31 of IBC, 2016, objecting the Resolution Plan MS. SHAILJA GOYAL …Applicant VERSUS Mr. AJIT JAIN Resolution Professional of Sare Gurugram Private Limited …Respondent No. 1

MONITORING AGENCY OF SGPL …Respondent No. 2 4. IN THE MATTER OF IA 3506/2023: Under Section 60 (5) r/w Section 31 of IBC, 2016, objecting the Resolution Plan MR. ABHISHEK SINGHAL …Applicant VERSUS Mr. AJIT JAIN Resolution Professional of Sare Gurugram Private Limited …Respondent No. 1 MONITORING AGENCY OF SGPL IA- 2690(PB)/2023, 3503(PB)/2023, 3505(PB)/2023, 3506(PB)/2023, 3507(PB)/2023 in CP-(IB)-300(PB) of 2020

…Respondent No. 2 5. IN THE MATTER OF IA 3507/2023: Under Section 60 (5) r/w Section 31 of IBC, 2016, objecting the Resolution Plan MS. SHAILJA GOYAL …Applicant VERSUS Mr. AJIT JAIN Resolution Professional of Sare Gurugram Private Limited …Respondent No. 1 MONITORING AGENCY OF SGPL …Respondent No. 2 Pronounced on: 21.08.2023 CORAM: SHRI RAMALINGAM SUDHAKAR, HON’BLE PRESIDENT SHRI AVINASH K SRIVASTAVA, HON’BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Present: For the Applicant : Mr. Kartikay Yadav & Mr. Tavish B. Prasad, Advocates Adv. Amresh Anand in IA No. 3503/2023, 3505/2023, 3506/2023 and 3507/2023 Adv. Geetansh Nagpal For Monitoring : Dr. Pankaj Garg, Sr. Adv. Ms. Nitika, Committee Advocates. Adv. Siddhant Kumar For the SRA : Ms. Wamika Trehan, Advocate

ORDER

IA- 2690(PB)/2023, 3503(PB)/2023, 3505(PB)/2023, 3506(PB)/2023, 3507(PB)/2023 in CP-(IB)-300(PB) of 2020

1. These Applications have been filed by the home-buyers / allottees of the housing project of the Corporate Debtor namely M/s Sare Gurugram Private Limited seeking the following reliefs: (i) IA-2690/2023: This is an application filed by the Applicant Mr. Mahendra Singh Bhati claiming to be an allottee in the project ‘Sports Parc’ of the Corporate Debtor. The prayer in this application is as follows: “1. To order the Resolution Professional to accept the claim of the applicant herein to the tune of Rs. 15,95,268/- and in addition an amount of Rs. 5,65,061.41/- paid by the applicant on account of pre- EMIs to the financing company. 2. To order the Resolution Professional to pay the amount of loan on behalf of the corporate debtor disbursed by the Financing Company to the tune of Rs. 14,60,116/- and further pay the monthly Pre-EMIs or EMIs on behalf of the corporate debtor till the re-payment of the loan. 3. To order the financing company i.e., M/s India bulls Finance Limited to not to charge the amount of pre- EMIs from the applicant as the applicant is not a defaulter in that part. 4. Pass any other order which this Hon'ble Bench may deem fit in the interest of justice.”

(ii) IA-3503/2023: This is an application filed by the Applicant Mr. Abhishek Singhal claiming to be an allottee in the project ‘Sports Parc’ of the Corporate Debtor. The prayer in this application is as follows: “i. Pass a direction to condone the delay in submitting the claim form CA by Applicant; ii. Pass appropriate directions to Respondent No. 1 and 2 to accept and scrutinize the claim of applicant submitted in form CA; iii. Direct the Respondent No. 1 and 2 to accept the claim of the Applicant as Financial Creditor of a total amount of IA- 2690(PB)/2023, 3503(PB)/2023, 3505(PB)/2023, 3506(PB)/2023, 3507(PB)/2023 in CP-(IB)-300(PB) of 2020

59,55,454/- (Rupees Fifty-Nine Lakhs Fifty-Five Thousand Four Hundred Fifty-Four Only) along with Interest and include the name of the Applicant in the list of Allottees and financial Creditors; iv. Pass a direction to Resolution Professional/Monitoring agency of SGPL to handover the peaceful possession of the flat booked by the Applicant; v. Any other order or relief as this Hon'ble Bench may deem fit and proper.”

(iii) IA-3505/2023: This is an application filed by the Applicant Ms. Shailja Goyal claiming to be an allottee in the project ‘Crescent Parc’ of the Corporate Debtor. The prayer in this application is as follows: “i. Pass a direction to condone the delay in submitting the claim form CA by Applicant; ii. Pass appropriate directions to Respondent No. 1 and 2 to accept and scrutinize the claim of applicant submitted in form CA; iii. Direct the Respondent No. 1 and 2 to accept the claim of the Applicant as Financial Creditor of a total amount of 51,95,688/- (Rupees Fifty-One Lakhs Ninety-Four Lakhs Six Hundred Eighty-Eight Only) along with Interest and include the name of the Applicant in the list of Allottees and financial Creditors; iv) Pass a direction to Resolution Professional/Monitoring agency of SGPL to handover the peaceful possession of the flat booked by the Applicant; v) Any other order or relief as this Hon'ble Bench may deem fit and proper.” (iv) IA-3506/2023: This is an application filed by the Applicant Mr. Abhishek Singhal claiming to be an allottee in the project ‘Crescent Parc’ of the Corporate Debtor. The prayer in this application is as follows:

IA- 2690(PB)/2023, 3503(PB)/2023, 3505(PB)/2023, 3506(PB)/2023, 3507(PB)/2023 in CP-(IB)-300(PB) of 2020 “i). Pass a direction to condone the delay in submitting the claim form CA by Applicant; ii). Pass appropriate directions to Respondent No. 1 and 2 to accept and scrutinize the claim of applicant submitted in form CA; iii. Direct the Respondent No.1 and 2 to accept the claim of the Applicant as Financial Creditor of a total amount of 59,55,454/- (Rupees Fifty-Nine Lakhs Fifty-Five Thousand Four Hundred Fifty-Four Only) along with Interest and include the name of the Applicant in the list of Allottees and financial Creditors; iv). Pass a direction to Resolution Professional/Monitoring agency of SGPL to handover the peaceful possession of the flat booked by the Applicant; v. Any other order or relief as this Hon'ble Bench may deem fit and proper.” (v) IA-3507/2023: This is an application filed by the Applicant Ms. Shailja Goyal. claiming to be an allottee in the project ‘Green Parc’ of the Corporate Debtor The prayer in this application is as follows: “i. Pass a direction to condone the delay in submitting the claim form CA by Applicant; ii. Pass appropriate directions to Respondent No. 1 and 2 to accept and scrutinize the claim of applicant submitted in form CA; iii. Direct the Respondent No. 1 and 2 to accept the claim of the Applicant as Financial Creditor of a total amount of 96,86,399/- (Rupees Ninety-Six Lakhs Eighty-Six Thousand Three Hundred Ninety-Nine Only) along with Interest and include the name of the Applicant in the list of Allottees and financial Creditors; iv. Pass a direction to Resolution Professional/Monitoring agency of SGPL to handover the peaceful possession of the flat booked by the Applicant; v. Any other order or relief as this Hon'ble Bench may deem fit and proper” IA- 2690(PB)/2023, 3503(PB)/2023, 3505(PB)/2023, 3506(PB)/2023, 3507(PB)/2023 in CP-(IB)-300(PB) of 2020

2. It is pertinent to mention that the Resolution Professional made a public announcement on 12.03.2021 and the last date of submission of claims was 24.03.2021. 3. On hearing the arguments of the Ld. Counsels for the parties and on perusal of the documents of record we find that the delay in filing the claim by the applicants is beyond reasonable time-lines, which can be seen from the table below: Sr. Name of Home Claim Delay (in IA No. No. Buyer filed on days) 1. 2690/2023 Mr. Mahendra Singh Claim not - Bhati filed with the RP 2. 3503/2023 Mr. Abhishek Singhal 03.06.2023 801 days 3. 3505/2023 Ms. Shailja Goyal 04.06.2023 802 days 4. 3506/2023 Mr. Abhishek Singhal 03.06.2023 801 days 5. 3507/2023 Ms. Shailja Goyal 04.06.2023 802 days

4. We are aware of the Judgment passed by Hon’ble NCLAT in the matter of “Puneet Kaur v/s K V Developers”. The benefit of the same has been granted by this Adjudicating Authority to all those allottees whose claims were rejected by the RP on the ground that it has been filed belatedly and further applications against the rejection had been listed for hearing before this Adjudicating Authority up to 12.12.2022. However, the delayed claims of home-buyers cannot be considered endlessly as this is beyond the reasonable time-lines. If such claims are allowed, then this Adjudicating Authority will continue to receive further such applications and the case will never reach resolution. Further, it will also cause a hurdle to the Successful Resolution Applicant in executing the Resolution Plan.

IA- 2690(PB)/2023, 3503(PB)/2023, 3505(PB)/2023, 3506(PB)/2023, 3507(PB)/2023 in CP-(IB)-300(PB) of 2020

5. While the principles of natural justice and fairness are of paramount importance, in insolvency proceedings, it is equally crucial to uphold the principle of finality and closure in such proceedings. Allowing delayed claims to be considered indefinitely goes beyond reasonable time-lines and undermines the efficacy and purpose of the insolvency resolution process. 6. It is pertinent to mention that the Resolution Plan of the Corporate Debtor has already been approved by this Adjudicating Authority vide its order dated 24.04.2023. At this juncture, such applications cannot be entertained by this Adjudicating Authority as it would squarely violate the ‘Clean-Slate Principle’ as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons versus Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited Through The Director & Ors Civil Appeal No. 1554 of 2021, the relevant paragraph is as extracted below. “86. …....After CoC approves the plan, the Adjudicating Authority is required to arrive at a subjective satisfaction, that the plan conforms to the requirements as are provided in sub-section (2) of Section 30 of the I&B Code. Only thereafter, the Adjudicating Authority can grant its approval to the plan. It is at this stage, that the plan becomes binding on Corporate Debtor, its employees, members, creditors, guarantors and other stakeholders involved in the Resolution Plan. The legislative intent behind this is, to freeze all the claims so that the resolution applicant starts on a clean slate and is not flung with any surprise claims. If that is permitted, the very calculations on the basis of which the resolution applicant submits its plans, would go haywire and the plan would be unworkable.”

7. In light of the aforementioned reasons and the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court, this Adjudicating Authority is of the opinion that these applications which have been filed seeking condonation of an inordinate delay of around 800 days and for accepting their claims cannot be IA- 2690(PB)/2023, 3503(PB)/2023, 3505(PB)/2023, 3506(PB)/2023, 3507(PB)/2023 in CP-(IB)-300(PB) of 2020 allowed, and are liable to be dismissed. 8. Accordingly, IA-2690(PB)/2023, IA-3503(PB)/2023, IA-3505(PB)/2023, IA-3506(PB)/2023, IA-3507(PB)/2023 stand dismissed.

Sd/- RAMALINGAM SUDHAKAR PRESIDENT

Sd/- AVINASH K. SRIVASTAVA MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

IA- 2690(PB)/2023, 3503(PB)/2023, 3505(PB)/2023, 3506(PB)/2023, 3507(PB)/2023 in CP-(IB)-300(PB) of 2020