The Supreme Court on Friday hinted that stressed real estate projects of Supertech may come under a court-monitored committee as an immediate fallout of the suspension of Supertech’s interim resolution professional (IRP) for two years over alleged lapses under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant said, “Though the IRP has challenged the order of suspension in the Delhi High Court, it seems to us that since projects were under court-monitored action, propriety demands that the IRP, till he is fully exonerated by the court or any prescribed authority, will stay away from the ongoing proceedings.”
The court referred to its February 5 order this year by which the government’s construction arm was directed to take over construction of 16 distressed Supertech projects. These projects were managed under an Apex Committee (AC) headed by now-suspended IRP Hitesh Goel. In addition, there was a committee for each project, also headed by the same IRP.
The court restrained the AC from taking any “major policy decision” as the bench, also comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi said, “We will not permit him to work even for a day. How can the AC mechanism be better when the head (IRP) itself is such. Look at the other members of AC. There will be a lot of conflict of interest. The ultimate sufferers will be the homebuyers and to some extent, the financial institutions.”
The apex committee was formed byNational Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in December 2024 which had besides IRP, four other members – two nominees of largest financial creditors, one nominee of NBCC and one expert from the real estate industry. Under this was a five-member Project committee for each project having IRP as chairman along with an expert from real estate industry and a nominee each of financial creditor, land authority, and homebuyers.
The order suspending Goel was passed by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) last month which was to take effect from April 29. Advocate Rajeev Jain, assisting the court as amicus curiae, pointed out that in the wake of IRP’s suspension, the court may consider forming a committee and bringing all 30 Supertech projects (including the ones being constructed by NBCC) under its supervision.
The bench favoured the suggestion and said, “We find merit in the suggestion of the amicus that a court-monitored mechanism be adopted for NBCC to proceed without hindrance.” The court noted that presently these projects are at various stages of development. Supporting the suggestion of amicus, the court posted the matter next week seeking names to be suggested for being part of such a committee.
“In this manner, all projects – completed, partially completed, substantially completed or those which are handed over to NBCC, shall be controlled and administered by one authority that may be set up by the court,” the bench stated in its order.
The IRP represented by senior advocate Nakul Dewan said that the AC does not just comprise the IRP and the matter regarding his suspension is pending consideration before the Delhi High Court. “For the past over three years, this IRP has worked tirelessly and brought the projects to this level. I do not know what the amicus has submitted. Allow me to respond to it before any order is passed,” Dewan said. Even Supertech’s lawyer argued that the court may not extend its order to all 30 projects.
The bench said, “Between individual interest of this gentleman (IRP) and the collective interest of homebuyers, we will certainly weigh in favour of the latter.”
The IBBI’s disciplinary authority had on March 30 found Goel guilty on nine specific counts under the IBC and the regulations issued under it. These lapses included failure to disclose material information in the information memorandum (IM), failure to convene the first meeting of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) within the prescribed timeline, and inordinate delay in filing avoidance applications among others.
For the benefit of IRP, the court observed that its order is aimed at maintaining “institutional transparency” and will have no bearing on the proceeding by IRP challenging his suspension. However, the bench observed, “If the competent authority has suspended him as a punitive measure, why should we interfere? Prima facie he has done some wrong somewhere.”
On February 5, the top court had entrusted the work of 16 Supertech projects to NBCC Limited using its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to ensure time-bound completion of projects.
The court had then remarked, “The first and foremost consideration before this court is to protect the interest of homebuyers and to ensure they are able to secure a social shelter comprising a residential unit for which they are eagerly waiting for almost two decades. Their hard earned money has gone to the coffers of Supertech Limited, part of which has been siphoned off here and there.”
The court directed that no court, tribunal or high court shall pass any direction to stop the project commenced by NBCC and all dues payable to statutory authorities, banks and creditors shall be considered from the surplus amount that is left after the flats along with other amenities are provided to homebuyers.
The order was passed in a batch of appeals filed against an order of December 12, 2024 by the NCLAT handing over the 16 projects to NBCC.
According to Suprtech, there are 40,000 flats across the 16 projects in Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Bengaluru. However, the homebuyers claimed the total unfinished flats to be over 51,000. These projects include four Noida projects (Capetown, Romano, Eco-citi and Northeye) and five Greater Noida projects (Eco-Village 1, 2, 3, Sports Village and Czar Suites), besides projects in Yamuna Expressway, Gurugram, Meerut, Rudrapur, Bengaluru and Dehradun.
