IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL: NEW DELHI

PRINCIPAL BENCH

ITEM No. 12
(IB)-22(PB)/2018
IN THE MATTER OF:
Daimler Financial Services Pvt. Ltd …. Petitioner
v.
Value Infracon India Pvt. Ltd …. Respondent

Order U/s. 7 of IBC, 2016 (CIRP)

Order delivered on 04.03.2024
CORAM:
JUSTICE RAMALINGAM SUDHAKAR
HON’BLE PRESIDENT

SH. AVINASH K. SRIVASTAVA

HON’BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

(HEARING THROUGH PHYSICAL MODE & VC)

PRESENT:
For the Applicant : Adv. Mishal Vij, Adv. Harshit Garg, Adv.
Rishabh Mishra in IA-3578/2023, IA-
4417/2023, IA4422/2023, IA-4423/2023, IA-
4424/2023, IA4454/2023, IA-4455/2023, IA-
4456/2023, IA3989/2023, IA-3883/2023, IA-
3884/2023, IA5199/2023, IA-4568/2023, IA-
4795/2023, IA4796/2023, IA-4993/2023, IA-
5053/2023, RA53/2023, IA-5841/2023, IA-
5928/2023, IA6098/2023, IA-6132/2023, IA-
4938/2023, IA5250/2023, IA-5251/2023, IA-
6341/2023, IA6609/2023 Adv. Mayank
Mittal, Adv. Silku Sharma, Adv. Sanyam Jain
in IA-4568/2023 & IA-5928/2023 Adv.
Shaswati Parhi in IA-4795/2023 &
IA4796/2023 Adv. Achint Kumar in IA-
6341/2023 Adv. Aastha Kaushik in IA-
4106/23 & 5841/23 Adv. Piyush Singh, Adv.
Vivek Kumar in IA6098/2023 Adv. Vaibhav
Tyagi in IA-1884/2022 Adv. Ritesh Singh a/w
Adv. Navneet K. Singh in RA-53/2023
For the SRA : Adv. Neeraj Kr. Gupta

ORDER
IA- 4568/2023 & IA- 5928/2023
The prayer made in IA -4568/2023 reads as follows:-

Page 1 of 7
(IB)-22(PB)/2018
IA-5928/2023
The prayer made in IA-5928/2023 reads as follows:-

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the SRA. This is the case where the plan of
homebuyers was approved by this Tribunal on 28.04.2022. Post the
approval of the plan, this allottee has a grievance that his representation
expressing certain grievances was not properly considered by the SRA which
are as under:-
In IA-4568/2023, the allottee’s case is that he has paid substantial amount
towards the allotment of the dwelling unit approximately Rs. 16 Lakhs and
to the surprise of this allottee, he now comes to know from the SRA that
amount shown in his account is only Rs. 6 Lakhs. The Applicant/Allottee
states that he has valid proof which were submitted to the erstwhile RP (now
suspended). There was a mistake on the part of the erstwhile RP in not
collating the claim appropriately. His representation to consider the
substantial amount paid i.e. Rs. 16 Lakhs approximately. Since, the same
has not been considered, he is aggrieved. Ld. Counsel for the SRA states
that an opportunity may be granted to the Applicant to meet the SRA in his
office with all the records so that the review of his claim may be done by the
SRA and his grievance is resolved. Ld. Counsel for the Applicant also
submits that there is a clause in the approval plan whereby enhanced
Page 2 of 7
(IB)-22(PB)/2018
amount should be paid. He is willing to abide by that condition subject to
his claim of payment as above being accepted. The differential pending
payment on the original allotment, if any, will also be paid. All this should
be reconciled by the SRA as directed by the Tribunal. Applicant is directed
to meet the SRA in his office on or before 09.04.2024 and the SRA will give
due consideration to all records and dispose of the representation. If
Applicant would be still aggrieved, Ld. Counsel for the Applicant has option
to proceed further in accordance with law.
In IA- 5928/2023, Ld. Counsel for the Applicant states that the erstwhile RP
(now suspended) raised a query to the allottee on the proof of payment and
the Applicant has responded to the e-mail of RP received on 23.05.2018 on
the same date i.e. 23.05.2018. The same may also be placed before the SRA.

IA-4993/2023
The prayer made in this IA reads as follows: -

Page 3 of 7
(IB)-22(PB)/2018
This application has been filed by two Applicants namely Mr. Faizan Anwer
Aziz and Ms. Sana Mazhar. The applicants were allotted one flat for which
they claimed that they have paid Rs. 30 Lakhs. However, the erstwhile RP
collated their claim for Rs. 3,89,748/-. The Applicants have given all the
details and responded by email dated 27.08.2018 enclosing all the
documents. The applicants are directed to produce the same before the SRA
and other documents as indicated in the earlier part of the order and seek
an appointment with the SRA to explain his entire case so as to enable the
SRA to take considered view in the matter. The SRA is also permitted to
issue notice to the erstwhile RP (now suspended) to cooperate in this
enquiry.
IA-4938/2023
The prayer made in this IA reads as follows:-

This application has been filed by Mr. Raj Deo Chaudhary. The applicant
claimed that he has paid Rs. 26 Lakhs. However, the erstwhile RP collated
nil claim. The Applicant is directed to produce the proof of payment before
the SRA and other documents as indicated in the earlier part of the order
and seek an appointment with the SRA to explain his entire case so as to
enable the SRA to take considered view in the matter. The SRA is also
permitted to issue notice to the erstwhile RP (now suspended) to cooperate
in this enquiry.
Page 4 of 7
(IB)-22(PB)/2018
IA-6341/2023
The prayer made in this application reads as follows:-

This is a case of homebuyers who had not filed their claim on time and this
claim was after the approval of the plan by this Adjudicating Authority on
28.04.2022. This is to clarify that the claim was filed on 21.08.2023. On
notice, counsel for SRA brought our attention to the order of the Hon’ble
NCLAT passed in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 832/2022 in the
matter of Mrs. Ranju Kumari Vs. Value Infracon India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors dated
09.02.2024 para 8-11 which reads as follows:-
….
8.No claim having been filed till the approval of the Resolution Plan, we are
unable to grant any relief to the Appellants in the present Appeal. The
impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority has already been
upheld by us. It is pleaded on behalf of the RP that the Promoters of the
Corporate Debtor has abandoned the project and no records were available
and whatever records could be collected from the Flat Buyers, on that basis
the Information Memorandum was prepared. The Plan having already been
approved by the Adjudicating Authority, no new claim can be admitted.
9. We, however are of the view that the dismissal of the Appeal shall not
preclude the Appellants to approach the Successful Resolution Applicant and
Page 5 of 7
(IB)-22(PB)/2018
to give details of payments given to the Corporate Debtor and it is for the
Successful Resolution Applicant to take a call on the said claim.
10. Two Intervention Applications have also been filed in this Appeal being IA
Nos.519 of 2023 and 520 of 2023. We having taken the view that no relief can
be granted to the Appellants in this Appeal, the Intervention Applications are
also rejected.
11. We, thus, dismiss the Appeal with the aforesaid observation and liberty.
No order as to costs.
…
In view of the above, IA-6341/2023 stands disposed of.

IA-4106/2023
In this application, the Applicant claimed that he is an allottee and he has
made certain payments. In the IA, certain amounts have been recorded and
it appears that it has been specifically modified before the plan was
approved by the CoC.
BE THAT AS IT MAY, the reliefs sought by the Applicant is to modify the
approved plan order passed by this Adjudicating Authority and for revising
and rectifying the balance amount in terms of the modified resolution plan.
Both the reliefs cannot be granted because post the approval of the
resolution plan, there is no question of modification as sought for by the
Applicant. However, the Ld. Counsel Mr. P. Bose pleaded that the SRA may
be directed to reconcile the account based on the original data furnished to
the erstwhile RP (now suspended). On this course of action. Ld. Counsel for
the Respondent is agreeable. The prayers a, b, b, d & e are declined.
However, liberty is granted to the Applicant to make a representation before
the SRA to verify and consider his claim on merits. In view of the above, IA-
4106/2023 stands disposed of.

IA-5841/2023
In view of the order passed in IA-4106/2023, the present IA-5841/2023 also
stands disposed of.

Page 6 of 7
(IB)-22(PB)/2018
IA-3578/2023, IA-4417/2023, IA-4422/2023, IA-4423/2023, IA-
4424/2023, IA-4454/2023, IA-4455/2023, IA-4456/2023, IA-
3989/2023, IA-3883/2023, IA-3884/2023, IA-5199/2023, IA-
6132/2023, IA-5250/2023, IA-5251/2023, IA-6609/2023
IA-4795/2023, IA-4796/2023
Ld. Counsel for the Applicant seeks some time to file rejoinder. At request
and by consent, list the matter on 08.04.2024.

IA-1884/2022, IA-5545/2022, IA-4407/2023, IA-4410/2023,

IA-4106/2023, IA-4795/2023, IA-4796/2023, IA-4993/2023, IA-
5053/2023, RA-53/2023, IA-5841/2023, IA-5928/2023, IA-6098/2023,
IA-4938/2023, IA-6341/2023, IA-589/2024

List all other pending IAs on 30.04.2024.

Sd/-
(RAMALINGAM SUDHAKAR)
PRESIDENT

Sd/-
(AVINASH K. SRIVASTAVA)
MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
04.03.2024
Lalit

Page 7 of 7
(IB)-22(PB)/2018