Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 16.05.2023
VINEET GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ashish Chauhan, Advocate.
Through: Mr. Rajeeve Mehra, Senior Advocate (Amicus Curiae).
Ms. Tanya Chowdhary and Mr. Rohan Srivastava, Advocates for RBI.
Mr. Kuber Dewan, Ms. Neeharika Aggarwal and Mr. Kaustubh Srivastava, Advocates for ICICI Bank.
Ms. Mani Gupta, Mr. Aman Chowdhary, Ms. Sonali Jain, Ms. Saumya Upadhyay and Ms. Sreemantini Mukherjee, Advocates for AVJ Developers
(India) Pvt. Ltd. (Through RP) .
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN NAJMI WAZIRI, J (ORAL)
The hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode (physical and virtual hearing).
JUDGMENT
1. The learned counsel for Resolution Professional (‘RP’) submits that it appears that Flat No. F-1002, AVJ Heights, Zeta-I, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, have been allotted twice over and the petitioner is the second alottee. The matter is under examination before the Principal Bench, NCLT, New Delhi.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no rational person would pay monies for purchase of property, encumbered or which otherwise has already been sold.
3. The final order dated 09.03.2020 in O.A. No. 751/2016 passed by DRT-II, New Delhi directs inter-alia as under: “...
11. In the light of the above discussions, the OA deserves to be allowed against the defendant Nos. 1 to 3, whose liability is joint and several.
(i) I allow this OA and direct the defendants Nos. 1 to 3, jointly and severally, to pay the sum of Rs. 62,23,133/- (Rupees Sixty Two Lakhs, Twenty Three Thousand, One Hundred and Thirty Three only) along with costs & pendentelite and future interest @ 10.0 % per annum from the date of filling the present OA, till its realization in full. The recovery shall first be made from defendant No. 3.
(ii) Defendant No. 3 is directed to pay the aforesaid amount within 30 days, failing which the aforesaid amount shall recovered from the sale of the mortgaged property at Flat No. F- 1002 & 1003, 10th Floor, Tower - F, AVJ Heights, Plot No. GH- 12/2, Sector Zeta-1, Greater Noida (UP) - 201307 owner by the Defendants Nos. 1 & 2. Short fall if any, shall be recovered from the defendants Nos. 1 & 2 as per the provision of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.
(iii) The cost of litigation be also borne by the defendant.
(iv) The applicant bank is also directed to file the revised statement of account before the Ld. Recovery Officer of this Tribunal.
(v) The Recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer.
(iv) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery
(v) Copies of the final order be sent to all concerned free of costs....”
4. As is seen from the afore-quoted paragraph 11(ii), the property developer/R-3 is to pay the monies in the first instance within 30 days of the said order; and in case of shortfall, if any, the liability would come upon the present petitioner. Recovery, in this regard, can be made from the latter, only after exhaustion of the preceding directions. The petitioner feels cheated and disadvantaged because he has neither gotten the flat nor the monies.
5. The learned counsel for RP submits that the issue of which reliefs would be available to persons such as the present petitioner is pending consideration before the NCLT.
6. In view of the above, the petition is disposed-off leaving it to the parties to pursue their remedies as may be available in law. Pending application too stands disposed-off.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN, J MAY 16, 2023