Case Law Details
Amit Tyagi Vs Indirapuram Habitat Centre Pvt. Ltd. (NCLAT New Delhi)
NCLAT held that rights of allottees cannot be affected in the CIRP as their interest is to be appropriately preserved and protected and it further held that The RP, who is running the business of the Corporate Debtor is the best person to take a decision as to what part of the business of the Corporate Debtor can be carried out.
The NCLAT’s recent judgment reinforces the protection of allottees’ rights during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). In the case of Amit Tyagi Vs Indirapuram Habitat Centre Pvt. Ltd., the Appellant’s plea for execution of the Conveyance Deed was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. The RP, as the operator of the Corporate Debtor’s business, holds the authority to determine which aspects of the business can proceed.
Background of the Case
Amit Tyagi, an allottee of commercial space by Indirapuram Habitat Centre Pvt. Ltd./ Corporate Debtor, filed an appeal against the rejection of his applications (IA No.4252/2020 and IA No.4924/2021) by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench. These applications sought various reliefs, including direction to execute Conveyance Deed, release of monthly rent, and disclosure of transaction details during CIRP. The RP refuted these claims, citing ongoing forensic audit and legal obligations under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
