HOW IS INCLUSIVE CAA ANTI-SIKH?, CAPT AMARINDER ASKS SUKHBIR, SAYS LAKHS OF ANTI-CAA PROTESTORS CAN’T BE ‘SUBSERVIENT TO GANDHI FAMILY’
January 28, 2020
New Delhi, July 17 (IANS) Jaypee Infratech’s (JIL) corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) may get another extension as its lenders have sought the removal a significant period from the ongoing resolution process, during which the Committee of Creditors (CoC) were not able to approve any plan due to a confusion and pending decision on home buyers’ voting share.
On September 17, 2018, an application was filed in the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) for clarification on the apartment allotees’ voting share and the tribunal decided on it on June 4, 2019.
“In between the aforesaid period the Committee of Creditors could not approve any resolution plan. Therefore, request has been made to exclude the aforesaid period from 17.09.2018 to 04.06.2019 for the purpose of counting the total period of 270 days of resolution process,” the NCLAT order said on Wednesday.
“It is submitted that if such order of exclusion of such period is passed, it will be advantageous to all the stakeholders, particularly the allotees and the Corporate debtor will not undergo liquidation,” it added.
The NCLAT is likely to consider the plea as it has asked the lenders to file an affidavit by July 19, 2019, showing terms and conditions, as may be imposed, if fresh resolution plans are allowed to be accepted, after exclusion of the aforesaid period.
The appellate tribunal would next hear the matter on Monday, July 22.
The exclusion and eventual extension would further delay the resolution process, however, the extension as suggested, would raise hopes of a successful resolution.
Under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) a resolution process has to be concluded within a maximum period of 270 days, which the ongoing JIL’s CIRP has already exceeded.
The two-judge bench, headed by NCLAT Chairman Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya on Wednesday, also laid down the grounds for the terms and conditions saying there should not be any change in the apartment and amenities promised to allottees by the original developer.
The bench also said the land attached to the building and common amenities would remain with allottees.
During the hearing, Justice Mukhopadhaya said the appellate tribunal was working with the aim to deliver “justice to homebuyers”.
On Adani Group’s request for consideration of their bid, the Bench said it would have to file a fresh bid, keeping in mind the new conditions.