NCLT New Delhi Dismisses Homebuyer's Petition Against PSA Impex Pvt Ltd On Grounds Of Fraudulent & Malicious Intent

PSA Impex Private Limited (Corporate Debtor) launched a housing project named “Sampada Livia” in Greater Noida. The project of ten towers with 726 flats was supposed to be completed within 36 months. However, the corporate debtor abandoned the project after completion of only 10% of the work.

The homebuyers filed their complaint before the UPRERA, which led to the revocation of the registration of the corporate debtor. Thereafter, the UPRERA directed the SLB Welfare Association to take over and complete the project.

Subsequently, a group of 73 homebuyers filed the present section 7 petition before the adjudicating authority seeking initiation of the CIRP against PSA Impex Private Limited. And the SLB Welfare Association filed the IA under section 65 of the IBC, praying for dismissal of the CIRP petition on the ground of mala fide and fraudulent intent.

Contention of the Parties

The SLB Association argued that it has full authority to construct and complete the project and the petition has been filed with malicious intent to stall the ongoing RERA-complaint construction. It also argued that no CIRP can be initiated against the corporate debtor, as it neither possesses any assets nor holds control over the project.

Per contra, the homebuyers submitted that they have a threshold to file the section 7 application. Also, the corporate debtor had failed to complete the project within the stipulated time.

Observations of the NCLT

The NCLT observed that the UPRERA had authorized the applicant association to complete the remaining construction work in exercise of its powers under Section 8 read with Section 37 of the RERA Act, 2016, and the rules and regulations made thereunder. And there is nothing to show if the said order was quashed or set aside.

The tribunal also observed that the corporate debtor is not involved in any kind of construction and development work. Also, the registration of the corporate debtor has been cancelled by the Ld. RERA.

Further, the bench observed that the petitioners were also the party in the RERA proceedings and had the complete knowledge that the applicant association had been authorized to complete the project.

With the above observations, the tribunal concluded that the section 7 petition has been filed with fraudulent and malicious intent and not for the resolution of the corporate debtor.

Case Name: Mr. Inder Sain & 72 Ors. v. PSA Impex Private Limited

Case No.: IB-101(ND)/2025

Coram: Shri Bachu Venkat Balaram Das (Member-Judicial) and Dr. Sanjeev Ranjan (Member-Technical),

Order Date: 14.10.2025