━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 1 of 4
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY,
MUMBAI

1. Complaint No. CC005000000471463

Atulya Raghukul Apartment Association,Sachin Sahebrao Take,Nitin Suryakant
Sawant,Ganesh Vasudeovrao Kulkarni


... Complainants

Versus

Calyx Lenora Realty LLP,
Gaurav Sunil Somani, Sham Bhagwandas Laddha
... Respondents

2. Complaint No. CC005000000208207

Sachin Sahebrao Take


... Complainant

Versus

Calyx Lenora Realty LLP


... Respondent

3. Complaint No. CC005000000208207
/APPL/UH/1
Sachin Sahebrao Take


... Complainant

Versus

Calyx Lenora Realty LLP


... Respondent

4. Complaint No. CC005000000259144

Ramdas Balu Darekar


... Complainant

Versus

Calyx Lenora Realty LLP


... Respondent


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

Ld. Adv. Harshad Nanaware appeared for the complainant at Sr. No. 1.
The complainants appeared in person at Sr. Nos. 2, 3 and 4.
Ld. Adv. Nilesh Borate appeared for the respondent.


INTERIM ORDER


(Tuesday, 12th November 2024)
CC005000000471463 and 3 Other Complaints

MahaRERA Project Registration No. P52100017951


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 2 of 4
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━


(Through Video Conferencing)


1. The complainants above named have filed these complaints before the MahaRERA
seeking revocation of project registration (sr. no.1 ) and for refund along with
interest and compensation (sr. nos. 2 and 4) under the provisions of sections 7 and
18 of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred
to as ‘RERA’) in respect of the booking of their respective flats in the respondent’s
registered project known as “Atulya Raghukul Bldg - C” bearing MahaRERA
registration No
located at Haveli, Dist. Pune.

2. These complaints at sr. nos. 1,2 ,and 4 were heard by the MahaRERA today along
with an application filed by the complainant at sr. no. 2 for urgent hearing (sr.no.
3) )as per the Standard Operating Procedure dated 12-06-2020 issued by
MahaRERA for hearing of 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.

3. However, during the course of hearing, the MahaRERA has noticed that NCLT
proceeding has been initiated against the respondent - promoter under the
Insolvency & Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016.
Hence, the MahaRERA has perused the available record.

4. On bare perusal of the said order, it appears that on 06-06-2023 the Hon’ble
National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai (NCLT) has passed an order in CP No.
204/ MB-IB / 2021 filed by M/s. Madhura Infra Engineering Limited, i.e., the
Operational Creditor therein, against the respondent herein, thereby admitting the
respondent herein into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) in
accordance with the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016
CC005000000471463 and 3 Other Complaints
. P52100017951

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 3 of 4
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

5. Further, as recorded in para 4 (of the operative part) of the said order passed by
the NCLT moratorium has already been ordered against the respondent promoter.
In view thereof, as provided under section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Code, 2016, which mandates a moratorium on the institution and continuation of
legal proceedings against a Corporate Debtor (respondent herein) in respect of
which an order of admission into CIRP has been passed by the Adjudicating
Authority, applies to the respondent herein. 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.

6. The complainant at sr. no. 2 has confirmed the said NCLT proceeding and
contended that he has already filed his claim before the IRP.

7. However, the complainant at sr. no. 1 viz the association of the allottees formed in
the project has stated that although the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process
is on, the moratorium has expired as per the above mentioned order. However, on
bare perusal of the website of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, it
appears that no such order in that regard seems to have been passed. Hence, the
MahaRERA is not inclined to accept the contentions of the said complainant at sr.
no. 1 to proceed with this complaint.

8. Be that as it may, in the present case, in view of the aforesaid order passed by the
NCLT, the MahaRERA cannot proceed to decide these complaints against the
respondent at this stage and hence the present complaints ( at sr. nos. 1, 2 and 4 )
are adjourned sine die. In the meantime, the complainant at sr. no. 4 may pursue
his claim for refund before the CIRP if he so desires.

9. Thereby the application for urgent hearing filed by the complainant at sr. no. 2 (
CC005000000471463 and 3 Other Complaints

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 4 of 4
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

as mentioned at sr. no. 3) cannot be considered by the MahaRERA in view of the
aforementioned order passed by the NCLT. Hence, the same stands rejected.

10. However, liberty is granted to the complainants (sr. nos. 1, 2 and 4) to approach
MahaRERA after final disposal of the said insolvency proceeding pending against
the respondent, if need be.


(Mahesh Pathak)
Member – 1/MahaRERA

CC005000000471463 and 3 Other Complaints