Jaypee Case Court Hearing 16th July Entire Summary along with way ahead

Arguments  lasted for 40 minutes with Mr. Anand Grover,  senior advocate, arguing on behalf of nine Associations of homebuyers.

Mr Grover submitted that the resolution plan proposed by JAL is not viable as JAL itself has huge debts to repay and shall not be in a position to make good the financial commitments that it is making before the Supreme Court now. In the opinion of Mr Grover, the best possible route is to send the resolution plan back to the committee of creditors for reconsideration, in light of voting rights now being given in favour of home buyers. Mr Grover submitted that in his opinion the ordinance categorising homebuyers as financial creditors,  has a retrospective effect. Thereafter, ICICI’s counsel made submissions on behalf of lenders of JAL . ICICI counsel submitted  that JAL and JIL are separate legal entities and JAL  should not be dragged in the resolution process of JIL as JAL  has huge debt exposure  of its own.

The court shall now be examining the provisions of the insolvency and bankruptcy code in greater detail. The matter has been listed for further arguments tomorrow.