# In the matter of Ansal Hi-Tech Townships Ltd. IA-5384-2022 in CP (IB) - 596 (PB)-2021

> NCLT judgment dated 2023-01-06. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLT-05158. The case involves an application filed by Pankaj Mehta & Ors., the Financial Creditors…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 6 Jan 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLT-05158
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/ansal-hi-tech-townships-ltd-ia-5384-2022-in-cp-ib-596-pb-2021-09b55863

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an application filed by Pankaj Mehta & Ors., the Financial Creditors (FC)/Applicants, under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Ansal Hi Tech Township Ltd., the Corporate Debtor (CD)/Respondent. The FCs claim that the CD defaulted in handing over possession of flats/plots/units and in repayment of Rs. 41,81,90,116 along with interest @ 18% per annum as on 15.03.2021. The Corporate Debtor argued that the application is not maintainable due to lack of jurisdiction, as the threshold criteria of Section 7 of the Code (at least 100 allottees or 10% of total allottees from the same real estate project) is not met. The CD contended that the allottees are from

…

## Facts

Pankaj Mehta & Ors., acting as Financial Creditors, initiated proceedings under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against Ansal Hi Tech Township Ltd., the Corporate Debtor. The basis of the application was the Corporate Debtor's failure to deliver possession of allotted units and to repay a debt of Rs. 41,81,90,116 with 18% interest as of March 15, 2021. The project in question is 'Sushant Megapolis', a township developed by the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor argued that the application was not maintainable because the allottees belonged to different sub-projects within the township, each registered separately under RERA, and therefore the threshold of 100 allottees or 10% of the total allottees from the same real estate project was not

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is maintainable …

**Ratio:** The second proviso to Section 7(1) of the IBC requires that for financial creditors who

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLT reasoned that the township consists of several individual projects, each

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of Section 7(1) emphasizes the requirement for allottees to

…

**Application:** The NCLT applied the ratio to the facts by determining that the allottees in

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ramalingam…; SH. AVINASH KUMAR…
- **Appellants:** PANKAJ…
- **Respondents:** Ansal Hi-Tech…; M/S Ansal Hi Tech…

## Timeline

- **2003-11-22 — Hi-Tech Townshi…**: The government of Uttar Pradesh…
- **2006-11-06 — Incorporation of…**: Ansal Hi Tech Township Ltd. was…

## 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/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/ansal-hi-tech-townships-ltd-ia-5384-2022-in-cp-ib-596-pb-2021-09b55863