# In the matter of Arena Superstructures Pvt Ltd And Another vs. State of U.P. and Another

> HC judgment dated 2025-02-24. Citation: TCN-2025-HC-00038. The case involves a writ petition filed by M/S Arena Superstructures Pvt Ltd and M/S Purvanchal…

- **Court:** HC
- **Order date:** 24 Feb 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-HC-00038
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-new-delhi/arena-superstructures-pvt-ltd-and-another-vs-state-of-up-and-another-eb5278d3

## Summary

### Background

The case involves a writ petition filed by M/S Arena Superstructures Pvt Ltd and M/S Purvanchal Project Pvt. Ltd. concerning the development of Sports City in Sector 78 and 79 of Noida. The Noida Authority conceived a policy to develop Sports City, and a consortium of Xanadu Estates Private Limited was allotted the land. Later, the plots were subdivided. M/S Arena Superstructures Pvt. Ltd. was allotted a plot to develop a project named Lotus Arena-I. However, the project faced issues, including non-payment of dues, alleged irregularities, and the initiation of insolvency proceedings against M/S Arena Superstructures Pvt Ltd.

## Facts

In 2010-2011, NOIDA conceived a policy to develop Sports City in Sectors 78, 79, 101, and 150. A consortium led by Xanadu Estates Private Limited was allotted land on 2011-05-04, which was later subdivided into six plots. M/s Sequel Building Concept Pvt. Ltd. was allotted Plot No. SC-01/A, Sector-79. On 2012-10-19, NOIDA executed a tripartite sub-lease deed with M/s Sequel Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Arena Superstructures Pvt. Ltd. (ASPL). ASPL was to pay Rs. 60,37,50,000 plus interest. ASPL collected approximately Rs. 387 crores from homebuyers between 2014 and 2020 after selling 785 flats out of 1080. Construction halted, and homebuyers filed criminal complaints. A CAG audit revealed irregularities causing a loss of Rs. 9000 crores to the State Exchequer. NOIDA

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Noida Authority's decision to reject the revalidation of the layout plan for the 'Lotus …

**Ratio:** The approved resolution plan under Section 31 of the IBC, 2016 is binding on all

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLT approved the resolution plan, and the NCLAT allowed its implementation. NOIDA's

…

**Interpretation:** The resolution plan, once approved, is intended to revive the corporate debtor

…

**Application:** NOIDA's rejection of the revalidation of the layout plan hinders the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Mahesh Chandra…; Prashant…
- **Respondents:** M/S Arena…; State Of…

## Timeline

- **2010-01-01 — Policy Conc…**: Noida conceived a policy to develop Sports…
- **2011-05-04 — Land Allo…**: A consortium led by Xanadu Estates…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 — Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-7)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-new-delhi/arena-superstructures-pvt-ltd-and-another-vs-state-of-up-and-another-eb5278d3