Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 1 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY
AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

1. Complaint No. CC006000000375307

a/w Application No. CC006000000375307/APPL/IR/1
Parasmal Jain,
Parasmal Jain


... Complainants

Versus

1) Manomay Ventures Private Limited
2) Omkar Realtors Andheri Project Private Limited
3) Nirman Realtors Pvt Ltd
4) Golden Age Infrastructure
5) Vimal Associates


... Respondents
Alongwith

2. Complaint No. CC006000000396583

a/w Application No. CC006000000396583/APPL/IR/1
Ashok Baliran Rajani
Mrs Pinky Ashok Rajani


... Complainants

Versus

1) Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd,
2) Golden Age Infrastructure,
3) Vimal Associates


... Respondents
Alongwith

3. Complaint No. CC006000000429175

a/w Application No. CC006000000429175/APPL/IR/1
Balkishan C Sharma,
Gautam Sharma


... Complainants

Versus

1) Omkar Ventures Private Limited,
2) Golden Age Infrastructure,
3) Vimal Associates


... Respondents
Alongwith

4. Complaint No. CC006000000429176

a/w Application No. CC006000000429176/APPL/IR/1
Balkishan C Sharma,
Gautam Sharma


... Complainants

Versus

4) Omkar Ventures Private Limited,
5) Golden Age Infrastructure,


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 2 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

6) Vimal Associates


... Respondents

Alongwith

5. Complaint No. CC006000000429177

a/w Application No. CC006000000429177/APPL/IR/1
Balkishan C Sharma


... Complainant

Versus

1) Omkar Ventures PVt Ltd,
2) Golden Age Infrastures,
3) Vimal Associates


... Respondents
Alongwith

6. Complaint No. CC006000000429178

a/w Application No. CC006000000429178/APPL/IR/1
Pravin Joshi,
Rashmi Pravin Joshi


... Complainants

Versus

1) Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd,
2) Golden Age Infrastructure,
3) Vimal Associates


... Respondents
Alongwith

7. Complaint No. CC006000000429263

Manomay Ventures Pvt Ltd


... Complainant

Versus

Rashmi Joshi


... Respondent
Alongwith

8. Complaint No. CC006000000429277

Manomay Ventures Pvt Ltd


... Complainant

Versus

M/s Nest Value Assets LLP


... Respondent

Alongwith

9. Complaint No. CC006000000429279

Manomay Ventures Pvt Ltd


... Complainant

Versus

Balkrishna Sharma - HUF


...
Respondent

Alongwith

10. Complaint No. CC006000000439707



Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 3 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

a/w Application No. CC006000000439707/APPL/AM/1
a/w Application No. CC006000000439707/APPL/IR/2
a/w Application No.CC006000000439707/APPL/IR/3
Abhay - Kapoor


... Complainant

Versus

Omkar Ventures Pvt. Ltd.


... Respondent

Alongwith

11. Complaint No. CC006000000591281

a/w Application No. CC006000000591281/APPL/IR/1
Kiran Bhisaji Labde


... Complainant

Versus

1) Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd,
2) Omkar Realtors Andheri Project Pvt Ltd,
3) Nirman Realtors Pvt Ltd,
4) Golden Age Infrastructure,
5) Vimal Associates
6) Manomay Ventures Pvt Ltd


…Respondents


MahaRERA Project Registration No. P51800014195

Alongwith

12. Complaint No. CC006000000570831

a/w Application No.CC006000000570831/APPL/IR/1
a/w Application No. CC006000000570831/APPL/IR/2

Smita Sunderlal Agarwal,
Sunderlal Agarwal


... Complainants

Versus

1) Manomay Ventures Private Limited,
2) Omkar Realtors Andheri Project Private Limited,
3) Nirman Realtors Prvt. Ltd.,
4) Golden Age Infrastructure,
5) Golden Age Aashiyaan Private Limited,
6) Vimal Associates,
7) Anatomy Realtors Pvt. Ltd.,
8) Piramal Capital & Housing Finance Limited


…Respondents

Alongwith

13. Complaint No. CC006000000580933

8a/w Application No. CC006000000396583/APPL/IR/1


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 4 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Anil Dinkar Bhoge,
Mrs. Shital Anil Bhoge


... Complainants

Versus

M/s. Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd


…Respondents


MahaRERA Project Registration No. P51800017695


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

Ld. Adv. Nilesh Gala appeared for complainant at sr. no.1.
Ld. Adv. Godfrey Pimenta appeared for complainant at sr. no.2.
Ld. Adv. Naresh appeared for the complainants at sr. nos. 3 to 6.
Mr. Manish Jaju IRP for complainants at sr. nos. 7 to 9.
Mr. Jatin and Ankita- representative appeared for the complainant at sr. no.10.
Ld. Adv. Vaibhavi appeared for the complainant at sr. no. 11.
Ld. Adv. Nikita Kaur appeared for the complainant at sr. no.12.
Ld. Adv. Jayshree Gilra for the complainant at sr. no 13.
Mr. Manish Jaju is appearing for the respondents at sr. nos. 1 to 6 and 10 to 13
The respondents – allottees at sr. nos. 7 & 8 appeared in person
Ld. Adv. Naresh appeared for the respondent - allottee at sr. no. 9.


INTERIM ORDER


(Order Pronounced on Monday, 21st April 2025)
(Matter reserved for orders on 15-01-2025)

(Through Video Conferencing)


1. The complainants above named have filed these 13 separate online complaints
before the MahaRERA on various dates ( as per the details mentioned in below
table at para-no. 5) mainly seeking directions from MahaRERA, as mentioned
in the below table at para-no. 5, as prescribed under the provisions of the Real
Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘RERA’),
in respect of the booking of their respective flats by the allottees (as mentioned
in the table below at para-no. 5), in the promoters’ registered project known as


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 5 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

“Lawns And Beyond -Phase 1- Omkar International District” and “SERENO-
B, Omkar International District” bearing MahaRERA project registration Nos.
P51800014195 and P51800017695 located at Andheri, Mumbai Suburban.
(hereinafter referred to as the said projects).

2. These complaints were clubbed together ( although registered in different phases
, however, the layout is same) and heard on several occasions being filed with
respect to the said project and the same were finally heard by the MahaRERA on
15-01-2025 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 said hearings and made their respective submissions. The
MahaRERA heard the submissions of both the parties as per their appearances
and also perused the available record.

3. After hearing the submissions of both the parties, the following Roznamas were
recorded in these complaints–
On 23/10/2024 ( 1 to 6, 10, 12 to 13):-
“The complainants are present except in s.no.13(CC006000000396583). The
respondent is present. The complainants have prayed for possession along with
interest
and
compensation
for
delay
except
the
complainants
in
s.no.22(CC006000000570831) and s.no.23(CC006000000580933) who have prayed
for refund along with interest and compensation for delay. The details of the
allotment of the complainants, date of signing of the agreements for sale, the
date of possession, the total consideration, consideration paid are as per the
table given below :
Sr no./ CC no.
Flat details
AFS/
DOP
Total Amount/
Amount paid


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 6 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

12
CC006000000375307
A-0302, 3bhk, 3rd
floor A wing
10-10-
2018
31-03-
2022
Rs.
1,56,83,000/-
Rs. 89,10,868/-
13
CC006000000396583
B-1004 on the 10th
Floor, B wing
12-12-
2020
31-03-
2022
Rs.1,28,25,000/-

Rs.1,05,23,597/-

14
CC006000000429175

B-0401, Omnia A
and Omnia B
26-12-
2020
31-03-
2022

Rs.
1,25,37,500/-
Rs. 97,08,016/-
15
CC006000000429176
B-0404, Omnia A
and Omnia B
26-12-
2020
31-03-
2022

Rs.
1,25,37,500/-
Rs. 97,08,016/-
16
CC006000000429177
B-0402, Omnia A
and Omnia B
26-12-
2020
31-03-
2022

Rs. 92,37,500/-
Rs. 31,04,111/-
17
CC006000000429178
B-0201, 2nd floor in
the
Building
Omnia

29. 12.202
0
31-03-
2022
Rs. 90,37,500/-
Rs. 31,04,075/-


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 7 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

21
CC006000000439707

A-1102, 3bhk, 3rd
floor A wing
12-03-
2018
31-03-
2022
Rs.
1,60,48,500/-
Rs. 86,61,297/-
plus
22L
tax
(approx.)
22
CC006000000570831
905, N wing
31-10-
2018
30-03-
2023

Rs.1,05,00,000/-

Rs.28,19,000/-
23
CC006000000580933

O-1304
in
Sereno B,"O"wing

17-10-
2018
31-03-
2023

Rs.1,33,46,000/-

Rs.29,00,000/-

As the date of possession mentioned in the agreements for sale is over, the
complainants have prayed for possession along with interest and compensation
for delay. The reasons for delay mentioned by the respondent are:- i)delay due to
covid pandemic and ii) market conditions etc. The respondent may file its replies
to these complaints within a period of four weeks i.e. by 20-11-2024. The
complainants may file their rejoinder to the said replies of the respondent within
a further period of four weeks i.e. by 18-12-2024 (as applicable). The
complainants at s.no. 15 (CC006000000429176), s.no.16 (CC006000000429177)
and s.no.17 (CC006000000429178) need to verify the names of the allottees with
their respective agreements for sale, since the respondent -promoter has
mentioned that it has filed cross complaints against these allottees as well. The
complainants may also verify the details of the flats booked as per their
respective agreements for sale for the said complainants at sr. nos. s.no.
15(CC006000000429176),
s.no.16(CC006000000429177)
and
s.no.17(CC006000000429178). This may be done by the promoter by the said date


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 8 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

and necessary amendment application may be uploaded if need be with respect
to the names as well as with respect to the flat nos. allotted which should match
with the details of the respective agreements for sale. Accordingly, these matters
are adjourned to a suitable date after 18-12-2024 for final arguments by both
sides and as a last chance to the complainant at s.no.13(CC006000000396583).
List these matters for next hearing on 15-01-2025.”

On 23-10-2024:-( 7,8 and 9):-
The complainant-promoter is present. The respondent-allottees are present. The
complainant-promoter is directed to serve copies of the complaints on the
respondent-allottees within a period of one week i.e. by 30-10-2024 and upload
the service affidavit in the complaints. The complainant-promoter is also
directed to verify the name of the allottees as per the agreement for sale as well
as the flats allotted as per the respective agreements for sale since the
complainant-promoter has claimed that it has filed cross complaints as allottees
have also filed complaints against the promoter previously. This may be done by
the promoter by the said date and necessary amendment application may be
uploaded if need be with respect to the names as well as with respect to the flat
nos. allotted which should match with the details of the respective agreements
for sale. The respondent-allottees may file their replies to the complaints within
a further period of four weeks i.e. by 27-11-2024. The complainant-promoter may
file its rejoinders to the replies of the respondent-allottees by 25-12-2024. These
matters are adjourned to a suitably later after 25-12-2024 for final arguments by
both sides. List these matters for next hearing on 15-01-2025

On 15/01/2025:-
“All the parties are present. However, the complainant at sr. no. 12
(CC006000000375307) has raised the issue that even though the NCLT order has
been passed on 20-10-2024, the said order does not apply to the respondent by the
name ‘Vimal Associates’ since it is a partnership firm. According to the
respondent the said partnership firm is 99% owned by Omkar Associates and


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 9 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

there is a private company by the name ‘Anatomy Ventures’ which owns the
remaining 1%. Hence all the complainants claim that the said claims could be
proceeded against the respondent no. 5 which is Vimal Associates ( as
applicable), since it is a partnership firm with unlimited liability. However, the
respondent refutes this contention of the complainants. The respondent no. 1 has
also pointed out that as per the said order in company petition no. CP / IB / 3521
/ MB / 2019 under proceedings of I&B Code, an IIRP has been appointed in respect
of the respondent no.1. However, the respondent no. 1 and the remaining
respondent no. 2 to 4 (except the said partnership - Vimal Associates, as
applicable), have also merged in the said company. Therefore, the moratorium
prescribed under I&BC applies to the respondent - promoter as applicable.
Therefore, these complaints will have to be adjourned sine die till the proceedings
before the NCLT are completed. However, since the complainants have raised the
issue that the complaints are tenable against the partnership firm viz Vimal
Associates’, the respondent no. 1 may file a reply to the said issue. The said Vimal
Associates is ostensibly the landowner in the project and is being shown as
promoter accordingly in the project registration. The complainants may file the
said claim / application made in the hearing within a period of one week i.e. by
22-01-2025, since the complainants are relying on the section 25 of Partnership
Act, further 2 weeks’ time i.e. till 05-02-2025 is granted to the respondent no. 1 to
file its reply on the applications of the complainants. Accordingly, the matter is
reserved for order based on the application and reply, on the said issue whether
the moratorium prescribed under I& BC applies to all the respondents or not and
whether the complaints will have to be adjourned sine die till the proceedings
before the NCLT are complete. Accordingly, the matters are reserved for interim
order.”

4. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction the complainants as well the respondents
have uploaded the submissions as mentioned in the table below:


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 10 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

5. The details of the flats (in these 13 complaints) booked by the complainant-
allottees ( except in sr. nos. 7, 8 and9)herein, dates of agreements for sale, dates
of possession, total consideration, consideration paid and substantive reliefs are
as per the table given below –
Sr. No / Complaint
No/
Flat Details
Date of
agreement for
sale

Date of
Possession
Total
Consideration

Consideration
Paid
Relief

1. CC006000000375307


A-0302, 3bhk, 3rd
floor A wing along
with 2 car parking

10-10-2018

Clause 31- on or
before 30-09-2020
subject to grace
period of 18
months
Rs. 1,56,83,000/-
Rs. 89,10,868/-
Interest for delay till handing over
the possession; not to demand
any further monies till possession
with occupation certificate; in
alternative to the above prayer if
authority directs to pay further
monies under agreement for sale
then the respondents be directs to
pay delayed possession interest
till actual handing over the
possession; to pass on the GST
input tax credit in a time bound
manner; cost and penalty.

2. CC006000000396583
06-07-2023

B-1004 on the 10th
Floor, B wing
26-12-2020

Clause 31- 31-12-
2022 subject to
grace period of 6
months
Rs.1,28,25,000/-
Rs.1,05,23,597/-
Interest till handing over the
possession; compensation and
cost
Sr. No. /
Complaint No
Reply

of
the
respondent
i.e
Vimal Associate
Written Submission by
the complainant

1. CC006000000375307
03-02-2025
Not uploaded

2. CC006000000396583
03-02-2025
20-01-2025

3. CC006000000429175
03-02-2025
Not uploaded

4. CC006000000429176
03-02-2025
Not uploaded

5. CC006000000429177
03-02-2025
Not uploaded

6. CC006000000429178
03-02-2025
Not uploaded

7. CC006000000429263
Not uploaded
Not uploaded

8. CC006000000429277
Not uploaded
Not uploaded

9. CC006000000429279
Not uploaded
Not uploaded

10. CC006000000439707
03-02-2025
16-01-2025

11. CC006000000591281
03-02-2025
Not uploaded

12. CC006000000570831
03-02-2025
22-01-2025

13. CC006000000580933
Not uploaded
22-02-2025


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 11 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

3. CC006000000429175

09/02/2024

B-0401, Omnia A and
Omnia B
26-12-2020

Clause 31- 31-12-
2022 subject to
grace period of 6
months
Rs. 1,25,37,500/-
Rs. 97,08,016/-
Interest till handing over the
possession; compensation by way
of rent and cost

4. CC006000000429176

09/02/2024
B-0404, Omnia A and
Omnia B
26-12-2020

Clause 31- 31-12-
2022 subject to
grace period of 6
months
Rs. 89,25,000/-
(excl. taxes)

Rs. 31,04,075/-
(incl. taxes)
Interest till handing over the
possession; compensation by way
of rent and cost

5. CC006000000429177
09/02/2024

B-0402, Omnia A and
Omnia B
25-12-2020

Clause 31-
31-12-2022
subject to grace
period of 6
months
Rs. 92,37,500/- (
excl taxes)

Rs. 31,04,111/-
(incl. taxes)
Interest till handing over the
possession; compensation by way
of rent and cost

6. CC006000000429178
09/02/2024

B-0201, 2nd floor in
the Building Omnia
29-12-2020 (as
per complainant )

Clause 31-
31-12-2022
subject to grace
period of 6
months
Rs. 90,37,500/-
(excl taxes)

Rs. 31,04,075/-
Interest till handing over the
possession; compensation by way
of rent and cost

7. CC006000000429263
(Promoter Complaint)

16/02/2024

0201 on 02nd floor B
Wing
08-02-2021

Not mentioned


Rs. 90,37,500/

Rs 29,00,618/-
(incl taxes)
Direct to forthwith pay Rs.
55,80,610/- along with the interest
from the date of default till
realization; to pay future amount
due; cost

8. CC006000000429277
(Promoter Complaint)

16/02/2024

0402, 04th floor B
Wing
25-12-2014

Not mentioned

Rs. 92,37,500/-

Rs.29,00,618/-
(incl taxes)
Direct to forthwith pay Rs.
57,55,595/- along with the
interest from the date of default
till realization; to pay future
amount due; cost

9. CC006000000429279
( Cross complaint
with sr no 4)
16/02/2024


B-0404, Omnia A and
Omnia B
26-12-2020

Not mentioned
Rs. 89,25,000/-
(excl. taxes)

Not mentioned
Not mentioned

10. C006000000439707
26/03/2024
A-1102, 3bhk, 3rd floor
A wing
12-03-2018

Clause 31-30-09-
2020 subject to
Rs. 1,60,48,500/-
Rs. 86,61,297/-
(approx.)
Possession along with amenities,
not to demand any amount which
is not mentioned in afs; interest
for delay; compensation and cost,
raise demand only after


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 12 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

grace period of
18 months
adjustment of delay
compensation payable to the
complainants

11. C006000000591281

22/07/2024
A-1901, Omnia
Building “A” Wing

08-03-2018

30-09-2020
Rs.2,05,00,000/-

Rs.1,69,16,208/-
Refund along with interest and
compensation for delay.

12. CC006000000570831
25/06/2024

905, N wing
31-10-2018
30-03-2023
Rs.1,05,00,000/-
Rs.28,19,000/-
Refund along with interest;
reimbursement of stamp duty;
registration and GST; repay the
EMI under the subvention
scheme; compensation and cost

13. CC006000000580933
27/06/2024

O-1304 in Sereno
B,"O"wing
17-10-2018

31-03-2023
Rs.1,33,46,000/-
Rs.29,00,000/-
refund along with interest; to
keep the Right Title and interest
as per AFS till the time entire
claim in this complaint is realized;
Compensation by way of rent;
compensation of mental agony;
and cost

6. In the present case, it is pertinent to note that the complaints at sr. nos.
1,2,3,4,5,6,10,11,12 and 13 have been filed by the complainant allottees (hereinafter
referred to as the ‘allottees’ for the sake of brevity) and the complaints at sr. nos. 7
, 8 and 9 have been filed by the complainant promoters (hereinafter referred to as
the promoters for the sake of brevity). In fact the complaints at sr.nos. 4
(CC006000000429176) filed by the allottees and complaint at sr. no. 9
(CC006000000429279) filed by the promoters are cross complaints and the same
have been filed seeking counter reliefs under the provisions of the RERA.

7. Furthermore, the allottees herein have filed these complaints seeking various reliefs
under section 18 of the RERA towards possession of their flats along with interest
and compensation/refund along with interest and compensation (as applicable).
However, the promoters have filed the said complaints seeking directions to the
allottees to make the timely payments etc. under the provisions of the RERA.

8. Although these complaints have been filed with respect to different project
registration numbers, however, the said projects have one and the same layout and


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 13 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

hence, these complaints were clubbed together and heard by the MahaRERA on 15-
01-2025.

9. However, during the course of hearing held on 15-01-2025, the promoter (M/s.
Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd now known as Manomay Ventures Pvt Ltd) has stated
that there is NCLT proceeding initiated against the promoter under the Insolvency
& Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016. Hence, these
complaints cannot be proceeded further, at this stage.

10. However, the allottees at sr. no. 1 have raised the issue that even though the NCLT
order has been passed on 20-10-2024, the said order does not apply to the promoter
viz. ‘Vimal Associates’ since it is a partnership firm. Hence, all the allottees who
filed the aforesaid complaints have contended that these complaints can be
proceeded with against the said promoter viz M/s. Vimal Associates.

11. The promoter has refuted the said submissions made by the allottees and stated that
the said partnership firm (Vimal Associates) is 99% owned by Omkar Ventures Pvt
Ltd and there is a private company by the name ‘Anotomy Realtors Pvt. Ltd’ which
owns the remaining 1%. Hence, it has prayed to adjourn these complaints sine die
till final disposal of the said pending NCLT proceeding filed against it.

12. In view of these rival submission made by both the parties, the MahaRERA has
directed all the parties to file their respective submissions on the core issue as to
whether the moratorium prescribed under I& BC applies to all the promoters or not
and whether these complaints will have to be adjourned sine die till the proceedings
before the NCLT are complete. Hence, all the parties concerned were directed to file
their respective submissions on record of MahaRERA.

13. The allottees have uploaded their written submission on the said core issue of
applicability of the said NCLT order to all the promoters, in which they have stated
following submissions:-

Complaint
No
Submissions



Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 14 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

2
The said complaint has been filed against respondent nos. 1 to 3 who are co-
promoters and as such the order passed by NCLT against respondent no. 1 is
inapplicable against respondent no. 2 & 3. Therefore, there is no impediment
either under the provisions of insolvency and the Bankruptcy Code under
RERA, to proceed against respondent nos. 2 and 3. As such the present matter
be proceeded against respondent no. 2 &3 in accordance with the law.

10. The respondent no. 5 is a partnership firm which means that it is a collective
entity for all the partners. Moreover in partnership firms, the liability of the
partner is unlimited. This means that every partner is liable for the debt of a
firm incurred during the business of the firm. These debts may be recovered
from the partner’s private property if the joint estate is insufficient to meet
the needs entirely. The complainant’s reproduced section 25 & 26 of the
partnership act. Notably the respondents have been jointly benefiting
themselves from the accrued interest on the amounts paid by the complainants
since May 2013. Under the Indian Partnership Act, the partnership firm i.e
Vimal Associates is jointly and severally liable for the acts of its partners,
including financial liabilities arising due to insolvency. The firm, being a
registered entity under RERA, is obligated to ensure timely refunds or
possessions as per the provisions of the RERA Act. The order of NCLT does
not absolve the firm of its obligations towards customers and the entire
partnership should bear responsibility for refunding the money.
12
The respondent Vimal Associates is ostensibly the landowner and also a
promoter in the said project. The Hon’ble NCLT vide its order dated 20-10-
2024 in the Company Petition No. CP/IB/3521/MB/2019 under the
proceeding of IBC, has appointed an IRP in respect of Manomay Ventures
Private Limited (Erstwhile Omkar Ventures Pvt. Ltd ), the respondent no. 1
and hence the moratorium period prescribed under IBC does not apply to the
other respondents i. e respondent no. 2 to 7. As the other respondents are not
covered under the moratorium period. Further the said respondent is a
partnership firm with 99% ownership by Omkar Associates and other 1%
owned by the respondent no. 7. They shall have unlimited liability for the
debts and obligations of the firm. The respondent no. 7 shall be jointly and
severally responsible for the defaults and debts incurred even if it owns 1% in
the firm. Under the RERA Act, there is no distinction between the developer,
landowner, investor, development / project manager etc. When it comes to the


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 15 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

liability of the promoter, all such promoters are jointly liable for their
obligation. Hence the rest of the respondents, i.2 to 7, shall be liable and
proceedings pending before the Hon’ble NCLT against respondent no. 1
should not affect the proceedings against the rest of the respondents. They
further reproduced clause 25 of the Partnership Act 1932. Hence, they have
prayed for continuing proceedings against the other respondents.
13
The complainant has stated that the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)
order dated 20-10-2024 does not apply to respondent no. 2, Vimal Associates,
since it is a partnership firm and not a corporate entity subject to proceedings
under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). Moreover, it is a well-
established principle that a partnership firm is a distinct legal entity from its
partners and parent entities and that the protections afforded under the IBC to
corporate debtors do not extend to partnership firms unless specific insolvency
proceedings are initiated against them under the applicable law. The
complainant, therefore, maintains that the moratorium under the IBC does not
protect Vimal Associates and that it remains fully liable for claims brought
against it. The moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC, 2016, is expressly
applicable to corporate debtors, i.e., companies undergoing corporate
insolvency resolution proceedings. The provision explicitly prohibits the
continuation or initiation of legal proceedings against a corporate debtor
during the resolution process. However, it does not extend to partnership
firms, which are governed separately under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932.
Since Vimal Associates is a partnership firm, it does not fall within the ambit
of "corporate debtor" as defined under Section 3(8) of the IBC. Therefore, any
claims against Vimal Associates remain actionable, and the moratorium in
respect of Omkar Associates or any other corporate respondent cannot be used
as a defence by Vimal Associates to evade liability. Furthermore, a corporate
entity's insolvency does not automatically absolve its subsidiary or related
non-corporate entities from their independent legal obligations. The financial
distress of Omkar Associates does not provide any legal immunity to Vimal
Associates, and the latter continues to be liable for its contractual and statutory
obligations. Since the Respondent in the hearing dated 15.01.2025 has admitted
that Omkar Associates owns 99% of Vimal Associates, it is clear that Omkar
Associates, as a majority partner, continues to bear liability for all legal claims
against Vimal Associates. The financial position of Omkar Associates does not


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 16 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

dissolve the liability of Vimal Associates as a separate entity, nor does it
prevent legal action from being initiated against it. Hence, he prayed to reject
the application filed by the Vimal Associates to be excused from the liability
based on the ongoing NCLT proceedings against Omkar Associates, and hold
the said respondent independently liable for the claims of the complainant and
allow the proceedings against the said respondent.

14. The promoter in complaints at sr.nos. 1 to 11 has filed online applications (as
per the cause title mentioned above) vide which it has uploaded the affidavit in
reply / application seeking interim relief/ stay application on behalf of the said
promoter viz M/s. Vimal Associates (as applicable). The said affidavit in reply
was filed by Vimal Associates
on 14-01-2025 in the Appeal No.
AT006000000245180/ 2024 (filed by the other allottees of the said project viz Mr.
Deepak Motwani) pending before the Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal. Vide this, the
said promoter has submitted the copy of the order passed by National Company
Law Tribunal (NCLT) dated 28-10-2024 pertaining to the CIRP in respect of
promoter viz Manomay Ventures Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Omkar Ventures
Pvt. Ltd.) and submitted that an IRP has been appointed. Further vide an order
dated 10-12-2024, the Hon’ble Appellate Authority had directed to produce
partnership deed on its record. The said Vimal Associates has stated therein that
by way of Deed of Retirement - Cum Admission dated 30-07-2015, the promoter
viz Omkar Ventures Pvt. Ltd. and Anotomy Realtors Pvt. Ltd. became the
incoming partners (in M/s. Vimal Associates) and started carrying business in
name and style of M/s. Vimal Associates. Further, the promoter viz M/s. Omkar
Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Anotomy Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Flashpoint Developers Pvt. Ltd
and Shivalik Ventures Pvt. Ltd were carrying out the business in the name of
M/s. Vimal Associates. However, by way of retirement deed dated 03-08-2015
the Flashpoint Developers Pvt. Ltd and Shivalik Ventures Pvt. Ltd. retired from
the said partnership firm. Now, only Omkar Ventures Pvt. Ltd. and Anotomy
Realtors Pvt. Ltd. are partners in the firm M/s. Vimal Associates. It has further
stated that the name of the promoter viz Omkar Ventures Pvt. Ltd was


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 17 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

changed to Manomay Ventures Pvt. Ltd. with effect from 18-04-2022. Hence, it
has contended that the said NCLT order is applicable to all the promoters
including the said M/s. Vimal Associates. Hence, it has prayed to adjourn these
matters till final disposal of the said pending NCLT proceeding filed against the
promoter.

15. The MahaRERA has examined the rival submissions made by both the parties on
the core issue whether the moratorium prescribed under I& BC applies to all the
promoters or not and whether these complaints will have to be adjourned sine
die till the proceedings before the NCLT are complete.

16. The allottees have alleged that since one of the promoters viz. M/s. Vimal
Associates is a partnership firm, the said NCLT order is not applicable to the said
firm and hence, they have prayed to adjudicate these complaints against the said
promoter.

17. However, the promoter viz. Manomay Ventures Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as
Omkar Ventures Pvt. Ltd.) has contended that although the said promoter’s firm
(Vimal Associates) is a partnership firm, it is one of the partners in the said firm
having 99% share and the other partners viz M/s. Anotomy Realtors Pvt Ltd
owns the remaining 1% share. Furthermore, the other companies (except the said
M/s. Vimal Associates ) have been merged with it. Hence, it has contended that
these complaints will have to be adjourned sine die.

18. Be that as it may, in the present case, on bare perusal of the online complaints
filed by these allottees and the promoter as well and also the webpage
information uploaded by the promoter on the MahaRERA website, it appears
that the said projects have been registered by the promoter viz. Omkar Ventures
Pvt. Ltd (now known as Manomay Ventures Pvt. Ltd). Further while registering
the said project with the MahaRERA, it has mentioned the other promoters viz
Omkar Andheri Realtors Projects Pvt Ltd, Nirman Realtors Pvt Ltd, Golder Age
Infrastructure and Vimal Associates as promoters having revenue share in the
said project. However, except the promoter viz. Vimal Associates, the other
promoters have been merged with the promoter viz Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd as


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 18 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

per the promoter.

19. The record also shows that all the permissions pertaining to the said project have
been issued in the names of all promoters and they have also signed the
registered agreements for sale with the allottees. However, on bare perusal of the
declaration dated 25-10-2017 submitted by the said promoter viz Vimal
Associates, while registering the said project with the MahaRERA, it appears that
it has been mentioned that “ Vimal Associates is a partnership firm presently
comprising of two partners viz Omkar Ventures Pvt. Ltd(99%) and Anotomy (1%).
The Vimal Associates is proposed to be reconstituted wherein Anotomy shall retire and
Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd (99%) and Omkar Ventures Andheri projects Pvt Ltd (1%)
shall be the new partners of Vimal Associates subject to consent of lenders”.

20. It shows that one Anotomy Realtors Pvt. Ltd held 1% share in the said
partnership firm of Vimal Associates and majority shares holds by the promoter
Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd (99%). Moreso, it is not clear whether the said Anotomy
Realtors Pvt. Ltd has been replaced with the new partner with Omkar Ventures
Andheri projects Pvt Ltd for 1% share as per the aforesaid declaration. Hence, to
decide these complaints against 1% share against the promoter Vimal Associates,
by adjourning these complaints sine die against the other promoters is technically
not possible, as the same would definitely lead to delay in adjudicating the claims
of these allottees finally. Meaning thereby that even if these complaints are
decided against the promoter Vimal Associates for 1% of its share, the allottees
would not get their complaints resolved since the majority stakes in the said
project belongs to the promoter Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd (99%).

21. The allottees although have raised the issue and prayed to decide these
complaints against Vimal Associates, they have not denied the fact that there is
NCLT proceeding initiated against the promoter viz M/s. Manomay Ventures
Pvt Ltd ( Earlier known as Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd) under the Insolvency &
Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 and an IRP has
already been appointed. Hence, as per section 63 of the Bankruptcy Act, these
complaints cannot be proceeded against it.


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 19 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

22. In addition to these, the MahaRERA has also noticed that in the said project, the
Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal, while taking into consideration the said fact about
the pending NCLT proceedings against the said promoter, has passed an order
dated 08-01-2025 in MA No. 348 of 2024 (delay) filed in Appeal No.
AT006000000235161 (Shrinkhia Ghidiyal vs Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd) and
adjourned the said matter sine die till final disposal of the said NCLT
proceedings.

23. However, as pointed out by the promoter, the identical issue as raised by the
allottees (about adjudication of these complaints against Vimal Associates) in
these complaints is pending for consideration before the Hon’ble Appellate
Tribunal in Appeal No. AT006000000245180 (Deepak Motwani vs Omkar
ventures Pvt Ltd and Ors). The record shows that the said matter is adjourned
till 10-07-2025 for further hearing. Hence, the MahaRERA cannot wait till any
order is passed in the said pending appeal. However, whatever decision the
Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal will pass, shall be binding upon all the parties
including the MahaRERA.

24. Be that as it may, in the present case, admittedly, on 28-10-2024, the Hon’ble
National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai (NCLT) has passed an order in C.P.
No. CPIB/3521/MB/2019 filed by Satellite Developers Pvt Ltd, i.e., the Financial
Creditor therein, against the promoter (Omkar Ventures Pvt Ltd) herein, thereby
admitting the said promoter herein into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process
(CIRP) in accordance with the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Code, 2016.

25. Admittedly, the said promoter has challenged the said order dated 28-10-2024
before the Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi
(NCLAT) in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 2040 of 2024. However, in the said
Appeal an

INTERIM ORDER

dated 07-11-2024 came to be passed, whereby no stay
has been granted on the aforesaid order dated 24-10-2024 passed by the NCLT
and the moratorium is continued, however, it was permitted to carry out the
construction on site.


Complaint No. CC006000000375307
& 12 Others

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 20 of 20
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

26. In view thereof, as recorded in the order dated 28-10-2024 passed by the NCLT,
Section 14 of the Code, mandating 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;
applies to the promoter herein.

27. Hence institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against
the said promoter, including execution of any

JUDGMENT

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

28. In view of the above, the MahaRERA cannot proceed to decide these complaints
filed by the allottees as well as the promoters against the allottees at this stage
and hence, the present complaints are adjourned sine die.

29. Be that as it may, the said promoter may facilitate the allottees in filing their
claim, if any, before the IIRP appointed. However, liberty is granted to the
complainant - allottees to approach MahaRERA after final disposal of the said
insolvency proceeding pending against the respondent if need be.

30. However, liberty is granted to the allottees to approach the MahaRERA in case
any adverse order is passed by the Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal in the said
pending Appeal No. AT006000000245180 (Deepak Motwani vs Omkar Ventures
Pvt Ltd and Ors) by filing a necessary application before the MahaRERA.


(Mahesh Pathak)
Member – 1/MahaRERA