NOIDA: Public sector company NBCC and Mumbai-based private realty group Suraksha, the two applicants in the long-winded Jaypee Infratech Limited (JIL) insolvency resolution, have filed fresh proposals, which will be weighed by the committee of creditors (CoC) on June 10.
If the CoC, which comprises homebuyers and institutional lenders, finds both proposals compliant with the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, the proposals can be put to vote to pick one of the two companies to complete nearly 20,000 flats JIL has to complete at its Wish Town project in Noida.
After getting a month’s extension from the Supreme Court, interim resolution professional (IRP) Anuj Jain has sought a second 30-day extension to wrap up the process.
The deadline for the first extension was June 8 but more time was sought because the process remained inconclusive as the proposals went back and forth between the companies and the CoC.
The insolvency process is in its fourth year.
“This is hopefully the last lap of our struggle and a fruitful resolution will come from this round of the process,” said AM Gupta, a buyer.
For the thousands of buyers waiting, Suraksha has offered to deliver the flats in a time span of six to 42 months while NBCC has proposed a time frame of 15-42 months.
Both have asked for a grace period of 12 months.
To settle debts, Suraksha plans to liquidate 2,594 acres of land while NBCC plans to liquidate 1,903 acres.
Suraksha plans to keep the Yamuna Expressway while NBCC plans to hive off 90% of it to lenders.
“We hope this is going to be the final CoC for the JIL resolution and urge all buyers to cast votes for both resolution applicants to get a fair selection.
Buyers have been waiting for a long time and we are now hopeful that a closure is near,” Jayshree Swaminathan, a homebuyer, said.
Whoever bags the project will have to complete 19,500 flats at Wish Town in Sector 128, which is likely to require a corpus of Rs 6,000 crore.
The insolvency process stretched further after NBCC challenged the IRP’s decision to reject its latest proposal as non-compliant with the IBC.
Instead of a consent vote on Suraksha’s proposal, it was then decided to seek a vote on whether both companies should be given more time to come back with fresh proposals.
A majority voted in favour of that.