Complaint nos
. CC006000000397904 & 2 Ors

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

BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
MUMBAI

1. Complaint No. CC006000000397904


Jayaram D Shet


.... Complainant

Versus

Xrbia Warai Developers Pvt. Ltd
…. Respondent
Along with

2. Complaint No. CC006000000428716

Shiji Nirmal Pillai
Sulochana Varghese


.... Complainants

Versus

Xrbia Warai Developers Private Limited
…. Respondent
Along with

3. Complaint No. CC006000000429547

Patricia Khotu


.... Complainant

Versus

Xrbia Developers Ltd.
…. Respondent


MahaRERA Project Registration No. P52000004499


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

Ld. Adv. Rupali Padguleka appeared for the complainant at Sr. No. 1
Ld. Adv. Shivang Mishra appeared for the complainant at Sr. No. 2.
Ld. Adv. Gaurav Solanki appeared for the complainant at Sr. No. 3.
None appeared for the respondent.


INTERIM ORDER


(Monday, 11th November 2024)

(Through Video Conferencing)


1. The complainants above named have filed these 3 separate online complaints
before the MahaRERA on 19/10/2023 (Sr. no. 1), on 07/01/2024 (Sr. no. 2) and


Complaint nos
. CC006000000397904 & 2 Ors

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

on 06/03/2024 (Sr. no. 3) mainly seeking directions from MahaRERA to the
respondent to handover the possession and also to pay interest for delay (in the
complaints at Sr. Nos. 1 and 2), to refund the entire amount along with interest
and compensation (in the complaints at Sr. No. 3) 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 their respective
flats in the respondent’s registered project known as “Xrbia Warai / Neral - Ph
2,” bearing MahaRERA registration No. P52000004499 located at Warai, Raigarh.

2. These complaints were heard by the MahaRERA on several occasions and the
same were heard finally on 07-08-2024 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.
On the said dates of hearing, the complainants have appeared and made their
respective submissions. However, despite notice, the respondent remained
absent. The MahaRERA heard the submissions of the complainants and also
perused the available record.

3. After hearing the submissions of the complainants, the following Roznama was
recorded –
On 07/08/2024-
“The complainants are present. The respondent is absent. The respondent
has also neither filed any reply to these complaints / written arguments nor has
extended the project registration which lapsed in December 2022. Therefore, both
the sides are granted 2 weeks’ time i.e. till 21-08-2024 to file their reply, rejoinder
and written submissions in the complaints. The arguments of the complainants
have already been recorded in the previous hearing. In case the respondent does
not file any reply / written arguments the MahaRERA will be constrained to
decide these matters ex-parte against the respondent on merits. Further, the
complainants may file their rejoinder / written submissions even if the


Complaint nos
. CC006000000397904 & 2 Ors

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

respondent does not file any reply / written arguments. Accordingly, these
matters are reserved for orders suitably after 21-08-2024 based on the arguments
of both the parties in the hearing as well as reply, rejoinder and written
arguments filed in these complaints.

4. Despite specific directions given by the MahaRERA, the respondent has not
uploaded or filed its reply on the record of the MahaRERA. Hence, the
MahaRERA has perused the available record.

5. However, 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 Titan
Contracting Services LLP has filed Company Petition No. CP (IB) No.281 of 2024
against the respondent promoter under Section 9 of the I&B Code, 2016.

6. From the available record, the MahaRERA has further noticed that on 28-06-2024,
the Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai (NCLT) has passed an
order in CP (IB) No.281 of 2024 filed by Titan Contracting Services LLP , i.e., the
Financial / 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.

7. Further, as recorded in para 22 (i) 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


Complaint nos
. CC006000000397904 & 2 Ors

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


JUDGMENT

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

8. However, although the said company petition was filed by Titan Contracting
Services LLP , i.e., the Financial / Operational Creditor against the respondent
herein , during the course of hearing, neither the complainants nor the
respondent have ever informed MahaRERA about the aforesaid order passed by
the NCLT. However, the said crucial fact cannot be ignored by the MahaRERA.

9. Be that as it may, in the present case, in view of the above, 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 complainant
at sr. no. 3 may pursue his claim for refund before the CIRP if he so desires.

10. 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