Complaint No. CC12400345

CC12400346

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

BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY,
MUMBAI

Complaint No. CC12400345

Jade Q To T Residence CHS Ltd


...Complainant

Versus

Creatoz Builders Private Limited and ors


... Respondent

Complaint No. CC12400346

Jade E To J Residence CHS Ltd


...Complainant

Versus

Creatoz Builders Private Limited and ors


... Respondent


MahaRERA Project Registration No. P52100005242


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

Ld. Adv. Mahesh Kakade appeared for the complainant.
None appeared for the respondents.


INTERIM ORDER


(Thursday, 10th October 2024)

(Through Video Conferencing)


1. The complainants -societies above named have filed these two separate
complaints before the MahaRERA on 05-10-2024 mainly seeking directions from
MahaRERA to the respondent to complete the pending construction in the project
and other reliefs as prescribed under the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation
& Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘RERA’) in respect of the
respondent no.1, promoter’s registered project known as “JADE RESIDENCES -
2” bearing MahaRERA registration no. P52100005242 located at Haveli, Dist.


Complaint No. CC12400345

CC12400346

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

Thane.

2. These complaints were clubbed together and heard by the MahaRERA today 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 for the
hearing through their advocate and made their submissions. However, despite
the notice of hearing, the respondent no. 1 promoter remained absent.

3. During the course of hearing today, the complainants have pointed out to the
MahaRERA that the NCLT proceeding is initiated against the respondent no. 1
and CIRP has been appointed.

4. 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 Hon’ble National
Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai has passed Order dated 21-11-2023 in CP (IB)
No. 745 of 2020 filed by one Virendra K Pawar Proprietor of Shree Electricals
Enterprises, i.e., the Financial Creditor therein against the respondent no. 1
promoter, thereby admitting it herein into Corporate Insolvency Resolution
Process (CIRP) in accordance with the provisions of the Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Code, 2016. In view of Section 14 of the said Code, a moratorium
period on the institution and continuation of legal proceedings against the
respondent no. 1. Hence institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or
proceedings against the respondent no. 1 including execution of any

JUDGMENT

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


Complaint No. CC12400345

CC12400346

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

5. The complainants during the course of hearing have admitted the said proceeding
filed against the respondent no. promoter and the appointment of CIRP. Hence,
the MahaRERA cannot proceed to decide these complaints against the respondent
no. 1 at this stage and hence the present complaints are adjourned sine die. In the
meantime, the complainants may pursue their monetary claim (if any) against the
respondent no. 1 before the CIRP if they so desire.

6. However, liberty is granted to the complainants to approach MahaRERA after
final disposal of the said insolvency proceeding pending against the respondent
no.1, if need be.


(Mahesh Pathak)
Member – 1/MahaRERA