Complaint No. CC006000000344163


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

BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
MUMBAI

Complaint No. CC006000000344163

Prashant Rajendra Kamble


... Complainant

Versus

D.K. Realty (India) Pvt Ltd


... Respondent

MahaRERA Project Registration No. P51800000340


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

The complainant appeared in person.
None appeared for the respondent.


INTERIM ORDER


(Thursday, 11th July 2024)

(Through Video Conferencing)


1. The complainant above named has filed this online complaint before the
MahaRERA on 01-02-2023 mainly seeking directions from MahaRERA to the
respondent – promoter to refund the entire amount paid by him along with
interest and compensation for delay as prescribed under provisions of section 18
of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 (from now on referred
to as ‘RERA’) in respect of the booking of a flat bearing no. 503, in Wing No. 15
of the respondents- promoter's registered project known as “Livsmart Kurla”
bearing MahaRERA registration no. P51800000340 located at Kurla, Mumbai.

2. This complaint was clubbed with the other complaints filed by the other similarly
placed allottees of this project and the same were heard on 28-02-2024 and finally
on 29-05-2024 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 and were also informed
to file their written arguments, reply & and rejoinder, if any. Accordingly, the


Complaint No. CC006000000344163


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

complainants appeared for the said hearing and made their submissions.
However, despite notice, the respondent no. 1 promoter remained absent. The
MahaRERA heard the submissions of the complainants and also perused the
available records.

3. After hearing the complainant, the following Roznama was recorded in this
complaint on 29-05-2024 (along with other 2 complaints) :-
“The complainants are present. The respondent is absent. The respondent
has never appeared before the MahaRERA and as per the complainant in s.no. 10
(CC006000000375319) & s.no. 13 (CC006000000396725), the respondent was also
absent in the conciliation hearing. The respondent has also not filed any reply to
the complainant nor has extended the project registration which has lapsed in
December, 2021 despite directions. Therefore, the respondent is given one last
chance to file its reply to the complaints along with written arguments within a
period of one week i.e. by 5-6-2024. The complainants may file their rejoinders to
the replies of the respondent along with written arguments within a further
period of one week i.e. by 12-6-2024 even if the respondent does not file any reply
or written arguments. In case, the respondent does not file any reply or written
arguments, the MahaRERA will be constrained to decide the matters ex-parte
against the respondent. The complainants have prayed for refund along with
interest and compensation for delay. The details of allotment, the date of signing
of the agreements for sale, the date of possession, the total consideration and the
consideration paid is as per the table given below :
mplaint no.
t no.
eement for sale
session date
al consideration
d consideration
006000000344163 t no. 503, Wing 15 mentioned December 2020 86,71,500/-
19,66,696/-
006000000375319 t 1002
03-2016
1,15,09,000/-


Complaint No. CC006000000344163


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

2-2018+ 12 months grace 41,29,490/-
006000000396725 t no. 503, Wing 22 04-2016 31-12-2018
79,87,500/-
79,87,500/-

As the project is still incomplete, the complainants prayed for refund along with
interest and compensation for delay. In view of the above, these matters are
reserved for orders suitably after 12-6-2024 based on the arguments of the
complainants as well as the replies, rejoinders and written arguments filed in the
complaints.”

4. However, despite directions, both the parties have failed to upload any failed
other document after last date of hearing held on 29-05-2024. 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
association of allottees formed in this project viz LIV Smart Welfare Association
has filed Company Petition No. CP (IB) No.1170/MB-IV/2021 against the
respondent promoter under Section 7 of the I&B Code, 2016 agitating claim of
Rs.81,45,67,305.50/- against the respondent promoter.

6. From the available record, the MahaRERA has further noticed that on 15-11- 2022,
the Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai (NCLT) has passed an
order in CP (IB) No.1170/MB-IV/2021 filed by LIV Smart Welfare Association,
i.e., the Financial Creditor therein against the respondent promoter herein,
thereby admitting the respondent promoter herein into Corporate Insolvency
Resolution Process (CIRP) in accordance with the provisions of the Insolvency
and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.


Complaint No. CC006000000344163


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

7. Further, as recorded in para (a) (I) (a) 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 promoter herein) in respect
of which an order of admission into CIRP has been passed by the Adjudicating
Authority, applies to the respondent promoter herein. Hence institution of suits
or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the respondent promoter
including execution of any

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 the association
formed by the allottees of the captioned project, during the course of hearing,
neither the complainant nor the respondent promoter has ever informed to
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 this complaint against the respondent promoter at this stage
and hence the present complaint is adjourned sine die. In the meantime, the
complainant may pursue his claim for refund before the CIRP if he so desires.

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

(Mahesh Pathak)
Member – 1/MahaRERA