Complaint No. CC005000000106519

CC005000000106598

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 1 of 9
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━


BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

1. Complaint No . CC005000000106519
Aanchal M. Moolchandani &
Mahesh R. Moolchandani


.... Complainants

Versus

Marvel Sigma Homes Pvt. Ltd & 38 Ors.

.... Respondents
Alongwith

2. Complaint No . CC005000000106598
Mrs. Manju Anirudh Kaul &
Mr. Anirudh Kaul


.... Complainants

Versus

Marvel Landmarks Private Limited
Mr. Vishwajeet Subhash Jhavar
M/s Gagan Promoters and Developers
M/s. Gagan Construction


.... Respondents


MahaRERA Project Registration No. P52100001843


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

Ld. Adv. Harshad Nanaware appeared for the complainants at sr no. 1.
Ld. Adv. Sandeep Bali appeared for the complainants at sr no. 2.
Ld. Adv. Amit Patil appeared for the respondents nos. 1 and 2 at sr no. 1
and for respondent no. 10 at sr no.2.


INTERIM ORDER


(Thursday, 31st August, 2023)

(Through Video Conferencing)


Complaint No. CC005000000106519

CC005000000106598

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 2 of 9
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

1. The complainants above named have filed these 2 separate complaints
on 20-01-2022 and 15-02-2022 respectively seeking directions from
MahaRERA to the respondents to handover possession along with
amenities; interest for delayed possession; compensation and cost
under the provisions of the Section 18 of Real Estate (Regulation &
Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘RERA’) in respect of
the booking of their flats no.1401 and flat No J-802 respectively in the
respondent’s registered project known as “MARVEL ISOLA J
BUILDING” bearing MahaRERA registration no. P52100001843 located
at Mohammadwadi, Pune (hereinafter referred to as the” said flats”).

2. Since, these complaints were filed with respect to the same project, these
complaints were clubbed together and heard finally on 02-05-2023 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 for the hearing and made their
submissions. MahaRERA heard the submissions of the parties and
perused the available record.

3. After hearing the arguments of both the parties, the following Roznama
was recorded.
“The complainant is present and respondent nos.1 and 2 (in sr. no.9 -

Complaint No. CC005000000106519
) and respondent (in sr.no.10-

Complaint No. CC005000000106598
) is present. The respondents have
uploaded an order of the NCLT dated 24-01-2023 on record of


Complaint No. CC005000000106519

CC005000000106598

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 3 of 9
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

MahaRERA on 20-02-2023. Vide the said order, the NCLT has
appointed an IRP in respect of the company Marvel Sigma Pvt.Ltd..
Therefore, the respondents may file their reply including the said fact
on record within a period of one week i.e. by 09-05-2023. The
complainants may file their rejoinder to the reply of the respondents
within a further period of one week i.e. by 16-05-2023. These matters are
reserved for orders on the issue of NCLT and appointment of IRP
suitably after 16-05-2023 based on the reply and rejoinder filed in the
complaints. The further course of action in these complaints will be
decided once such an order is issued.

4. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction, the complainants at Sr. No. 1 have
uploaded their reply along with Exhibits on the record of MahaRERA
on 03-06-2023. The respondents nos. 1 and 2 have uploaded application
along with NCLT Order on the record of MahaRERA on 09-05-2023.
The same is accepted and taken on record. The MahaRERA has perused
the available record.

5. In the present case, the complainants in both these complaints have
approached the MahaRERA mainly seeking reliefs under section 18 of
the RERA.

6. However, during the course of hearing, the respondent nos. 1 and 2 viz
M/s. Marvel Sigma Homes Pvt Ltd and M/s. Marvel Sigma Landmark
Pvt Ltd have uploaded an application on record of MahaRERA, stating
that during the pendency of the present complaints, one company
petition which was filed by ICICI Home Finance Company Limited


Complaint No. CC005000000106519

CC005000000106598

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 4 of 9
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

against Marvel Sigma Homes Private Limited is allowed by Hon’ble
National Company Law Tribunal, Court – V Mumbai Bench on 24-01-
2023 . Vide the said order, Hon’ble NCLT, Mumbai prohibits the
institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings
against the corporate debtor in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration
panel or other authority; transferring encumbering alienating or
disposing of by the corporate debit any if its assets or any legal right or
beneficial interest therein; any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any
security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its
property including any action under the Securitization and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest
Act, 2022, the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor where
such property is occupied by or in the possession of the corporate
debtor. Moreover, as per the said order, moratorium period has been
started from the date of its order till the completion of the corporate
insolvency resolution or until NCLT approves the resolution plan under
sub section (1) of section 31 or passes an order for liquidation of the
corporate debtor under section 33. Thus, in accordance with section 14
of IB Act and as per the above stated order dated 24-01-2013, the present
complaints may kindly be stayed till completion of the corporate
insolvency resolution or until NCLT approves the resolution plan under
subsection (1) of Section 31 or passes an order for liquidation of the
corporate debtor under section 33. Further, in the present complaints,
if the complainants have any grievances, the Insolvency Resolution
Professional would be appropriate authority to approach and submit
their grievances.


Complaint No. CC005000000106519

CC005000000106598

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 5 of 9
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

7. The respondents further stated that in complaint at sr no. 2, though
Marvel Sigma Homes Private Limited is not a party, as per RERA,
Marvel Sigma Homes Pvt. Limited is declared as Promoter (Land
Owner / Investor) on the MahaRERA Project website. The respondent
namely Gagan Promoters and Developers and M/s. Gagan
Construction have assigned their rights in favour of Marvel Sigma
Homes Pvt Ltd and the same has also been declared by the respondent
while registering the said project with MahaRERA. Hence, the NCLT
order is applicable to the present complaints as well and the same can
not be ignored only because Marvel Sigma Home Private Limited is not
a party to the present proceedings.

8. The complainants at sr. 1 have uploaded their reply to the application
filed by the respondent nos. 1 and 2. They have stated that the NCLT
order is against respondent no. 1 alone. There is no order against the
other respondents. Therefore, proceedings against the remaining
respondents needs to be continued. The respondents are jointly and
severally responsible. From the actions of the respondents, it can be seen
that the objective is to delay the hearing of the present complaint.
Furthermore, they have relied on the

JUDGEMENT

passed by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure
Limited and Anr vs. Union of India and Ors in WP (Civil) 43/2019, has
clearly marked out the difference between NCLT and RERA (inter alia
in para 12, where it was observed,
When a home buyer approaches the NCLT, if his petition is admitted,
he does not get his money back in the near foreseeable future and has to


Complaint No. CC005000000106519

CC005000000106598

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 6 of 9
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

stand in line and await either the vagaries of a resolution plan which
give him some percentage f the monies owed to him, and/or completes
the project for him. In the event of winding up, he has then to stand in
line and receive whatever is available. As opposed to this, home
buyers/allottees can and do approach the authorities under RERA in
which upon showing breach on the part of the real estate developer,
they would be able to claim whatever has been paid by them in full
together with interest thereon. This being the case it is wholly incorrect
to paint a picture, as was done by learned senior counsel appearing on
behalf of the Petitioners, that trigger – happy allottees mala fide invoke
the Code to put pressure on developers to refund their money given as
advances. Also, it is wholly incorrect to say that highly solvent
companies would go in the red and then be wound up under the Code. If
in fact such companies are solvent, the Committee of Creditors may
decide to continue the same management or may decide to accept
resolution plans from other developers so that the real estate
development company continues as a going concern. Winding up is only
last resort, which will never really occur in the case of well managed
corporate entities.) and has finally concluded, “The RERA is to be read
harmoniously with the Code, as amended by the Amendment Act. It is
only in the event of conflict that the Code will prevail over the RERA.

9. Thus, the remedies that are given to allottees of flats/apartments are
therefore concurrent remedies, such allottees of flats/apartments being
in a position to avail of remedies under the Consumer Protection Act,
1986, RERA as well as triggering the Code.” Hence, they prayed to
RERA, to dismiss the application by the respondents, in the alternative,
in lieu of the NCLT, the matter be proceeded against the other


Complaint No. CC005000000106519

CC005000000106598

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 7 of 9
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

respondents (other than respondent no. 1).

10. The MahaRERA has examined the submission made by both the parties
and also perused the available record. In the present case, during the
course of hearing held on 02-05-2023, the respondent nos. 1 and 2 (in
complaint at sr no. 1) have brought to the notice of MahaRERA about
the order dated 24-01-2023 passed by the National Company Law
Tribunal in C.P.(IB) /672/MB/2021 filed by ICICI Home Finance
Company Limited, i.e. the Financial Creditor therein against the
respondent no. 1 viz M/s. Marvel Sigma Homes Pvt Ltd herein,
thereby admitting the respondent no. 1 (in complaint at sr no.1) into
Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) in accordance with the
provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. In view
thereof, and as per clause d) of the said order dated 24-01-2023, section
14 of the Code, mandates a moratorium on the institution and
continuation of legal proceedings against a Corporate Debtor in respect
of which an order of admission into CIRP has been passed by the
Adjudicating Authority, and it applies to the applicant no. 1 herein

11. Hence institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or
proceedings against the applicant no. 1 including execution of any


JUDGMENT

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

12. From the project information uploaded on MahaRERA website, it
appears that the respondent no. 2 (in complaint at sr no.1) and the
respondent no.1 in complaint at sr no. 2 viz Marvel Landmarks Private


Complaint No. CC005000000106519

CC005000000106598

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 8 of 9
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Limited have registered this project with the MahaRERA being
ongoing project on the date of commencement of RERA. While
registering this project with the MahaRERA the said respondent has
also shown the respondent no.1 (in complaint at sr no. 1) viz M/s.
Marvel Sigma Homes Pvt Ltd as co-promoter(landowner) having
revenue sharing in this project. Hence, the said respondent viz M/s.
Marvel Sigma Homes Pvt Ltd is also a promoter of this project against
whom these complainants have been filed.

13. Furthermore, on bare perusal of the registered agreement for sale
signed with the complainants at sr no. 1 it appears that the said
respondent viz M/s. Marvel Sigma Homes Pvt Ltd is party promoter to
the said agreement for sale. Also, the said promoter viz M/s. Marvel
Sigma Homes Pvt Ltd is landowner promoter of this project by virtue
of the development agreement signed by the respondents nos. 3 and 4
(in complaint at sr no.1).

14. In view of these facts, being landowner promoter of this project M/s.
Marvel Sigma Homes Pvt Ltd is also responsible for any violation of
section 18 of the RERA being owner of the project land. Hence, the
MahaRERA prima facie feels that there is no substance in the
contentions raised by the complainants at sr no.1 that their complaint
can be decided against other respondents. Also, the complainants at sr
no. 2 have not uploaded any reply to the application filed by the
respondent nos. 1 and 2. It shows that they have admitted the facts cited
by the said respondents about the NCLT order.


Complaint No. CC005000000106519

CC005000000106598

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 9 of 9
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

15. In view of these facts brought to the notice of the MahaRERA about the
pendency of the litigation before the NCLT, the MahaRERA cannot
proceed to pass any order in these complaints filed by the complainants
at this stage. Hence, these complaints are adjourned sine die.

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


(Mahesh Pathak)
Member – 1/MahaRERA