Complaint No. CC005000000010700


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 1 of 3
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━


BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, MUMBAI


Complaint No. CC005000000010700

Mr. Shrant Gour

Dr. Purnima Gour


... Complainants

Versus

Lake District Realty Private Limited

Pune Kondhwa Realty Private Limited


... Respondents

MahaRERA Project Registration No. P52100005657


Coram: Shri. Mahesh Pathak, Hon’ble Member – I/ MahaRERA

Ld. Adv. Ranbir Datta & Ld. Adv. Chinmayee P appeared for the complainant.
Ld. Adv. Abir Patel appeared for the respondent.


INTERIM ORDER


(Thursday, 03rd October 2024)

(Through Video Conferencing)


1. The complainants above named have filed this online complaint before the
MahaRERA on 22-12-2017, mainly seeking reliefs from MahaRERA against
the respondent - promoter to handover the possession and to pay refund the
entire consideration amount paid by her as prescribed under the provisions of
Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016
(hereinafter referred to as ‘RERA’) in respect of the booking of the flat no. 6602
on 6th Floor in the respondent’s registered project known as “Cove - Lake
District - Phase II” bearing MahaRERA registration No. P52100005657 located
at Yeolewadi, Dist. Pune.

2. This complaint was heard by the MahaRERA today as per the Standard
Operating Procedure dated 12-06-2020 issued by MahaRERA for hearing of


Complaint No. CC005000000010700


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 2 of 3
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

complaints through Video Conferencing. Both the parties have been issued
prior intimation of this hearing and they were also informed to file their
written submissions if any. Accordingly, both the parties appeared and made
their submissions. The MahaRERA heard the arguments of both the parties
and also perused the available records.

3. During the course of hearing, the MahaRERA has noticed that the respondent
no. 1 ’s company viz. Lake District Realty Private Limited is developing this
project and has registered this project with the MahaRERA. However, NCLT
proceedings were initiated against the respondent no. 1 company and the
CIRP was appointed. In this regard, the MahaRERA has perused the order
dated 02-11-2023 passed by NCLT in CP (IB) No. 787 MB 2021.

4. In the present case on bare perusal of the submissions made by the parties on
record of MahaRERA, it appears that the NCLT proceedings have started
against the respondent no.1 promoter and CIRP has been appointed. Hence,
the complaint cannot be heard by the MahaRERA.

5. Further, from the available record, the MahaRERA has noticed that on 02-11-
2023, the Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai has passed an
order in CP (IB) No. 787 MB 2021 filed by Nippon Life India AIF Management
Limited and Another, i.e., the Financial Creditor therein against the
respondent no. 1 herein, thereby admitting the respondent no. 1 herein into
Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) in accordance with the
provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

6. In view thereof, Section 14 of the Code, mandating a moratorium on the
institution and continuation of legal proceedings against a Corporate Debtor


Complaint No. CC005000000010700


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 3 of 3
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

in respect of which an order of admission into CIRP has been passed by the
Adjudicating Authority; applies to the respondent no. 1 herein, which has
registered the captioned project with the MahaRERA.

7. Hence institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings
against the respondent including execution of any

JUDGMENT

, decree, or order
in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority is prohibited.

8. In view of the above, the MahaRERA cannot proceed to decide this complaint
against the respondent no. 1 herein (a promoter which has registered this
project with the MahaRERA) at this stage and hence the present complaint is
adjourned sine die. However, the respondent no. 1 may facilitate the
complainants to file their claim before the CIRP if any.

9. However, liberty is granted to the complainant to approach MahaRERA after
final disposal of the said insolvency proceeding pending against the
respondent no. 1 if need be.


(Mahesh Pathak)
Member – 1/MahaRERA