Complaint No. CC006000000375173

CC006000000396483

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

BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY
AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

1. Complaint No. CC006000000375173

Neetu Shivdhani Vishwakarma


... Complainant

Versus

M/s. Karrm Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.


... Respondent
Along with

2. Complaint No. CC006000000396483

Alka Gajjar


... Complainant

Versus

Karrm Infrastructure Private Limited


... Respondent


MahaRERA Project Registration No. P51700010325


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

The complainant appeared in person in the complaints at sr. no. 1.
Ld. Adv. Krishna Agarwal appeared for the complainant at sr. no. 2.
None appeared for the respondent.


INTERIM ORDER


(Tuesday, 23rd July 2024)

(Through Video Conferencing)


1. The complainants above named have filed these 2 separate online complaints before
the MahaRERA on 08-04-2023 (Sr. No. 1) and on 30-06-2023 (Sr. No. 2) mainly
seeking directions from MahaRERA to the respondent - promoter to refund the
entire amount paid by them along with interest and compensation as per the
provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter


Complaint No. CC006000000375173

CC006000000396483

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

referred to as ‘RERA’) in respect of the booking of their respective flats in the
respondent – promoter’s registered project known as “Karrm Panchtatva - 2”
bearing MahaRERA registration no. P51700010325 located at Kasgaon, Dist. Thane.

2. These complaints were heard today by the MahaRERA 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, the complainants appeared and made their
submissions. However, despite notice, none appeared for the respondent. Hence,
the MahaRERA has perused the available record.

3. In the present case on bare perusal of the website of Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Board of India, the MahaRERA has prima facie noticed that the M/s. VSJ
Investment Pvt Ltd has filed Company Petition No. CP (IB) No.651/MB/2023
against the respondent promoter under Section 7 of the I&B Code, 2016 agitating
claim of Rs. 290,84,45,956/- against the respondent promoter.

4. From the available record, the MahaRERA has further noticed that on 29-02-2024,
the Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai (NCLT) has passed an order
in CP (IB) No. CP (IB) No.651/MB/2023 filed by M/s. VSJ Investment Pvt Ltd , i.e.,
the Financial 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.

5. Further, as recorded in para (d) of the said order passed by the NCLT moratorium
has already been ordered against the respondent promoter. In view thereof, as


Complaint No. CC006000000375173

CC006000000396483

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

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 complainants during the course have informed the MahaRERA that they are
not aware of such NCLT proceeding filed against the respondent promoter.

7. However, the said crucial fact about the appointment of CIRP in respect of the
respondent’s company cannot be ignored by the MahaRERA.

8. Be that as it may, in this 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 are adjourned sine die. In the
meantime, the complainants may pursue their claim for refund before the CIRP if
they so desire.

9. However, liberty is granted to the complainants to approach MahaRERA after final
disposal of the said insolvency proceeding pending against the respondent if need
be.

(Mahesh Pathak)

Member – 1/MahaRERA