The Mumbai bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has admitted a Section 7 petition against Dadar-based real estate developer Matoshree Infrastructure Pvt Ltd over an alleged financial default of Rs 209.72 crore. The order has triggered the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), with the final amount payable to be assessed during the proceedings.
A bench comprising Nilesh Sharma, Member (Judicial), and Sameer Kakar, Member (Technical), passed the order on a petition filed by Omkara Assets Reconstruction Pvt Ltd under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The financial creditor claimed that Rs 209.72 crore remained outstanding as of February 24, 2025.
Dispute Linked To Mulund Redevelopment Project
The financial dispute relates to construction finance provided for the “Matoshree Nisarg” redevelopment project in Mulund East. HDFC had sanctioned three loan facilities between 2013 and 2017, totalling Rs 95 crore. A further facility of Rs 16.51 crore was sanctioned in December 2020, of which Rs 14.23 crore was disbursed in instalments.
Letters of Guarantee were executed by Ashutosh Gunwant Abhayankar, Rajan Ganesh Shirodkar and Vijay Chintan Yeol in December 2013.
The first three loan accounts were classified as non-performing assets (NPAs) on March 31, 2019. HDFC subsequently issued a demand notice seeking Rs 4.14 crore. Matoshree Infrastructure cited cash-flow difficulties and assured the lender that the accounts would be regularised.
However, the defaults continued. HDFC issued another notice in September 2021, followed by a recall notice and a demand under the SARFAESI Act in December 2022 seeking Rs 145.99 crore.
Loan Rights Assigned To Omkara ARC
HDFC later assigned its rights under the loan facilities to Omkara Assets Reconstruction in March 2023. The ARC subsequently approached the NCLT under Section 7 of the IBC.
The tribunal observed that Matoshree Infrastructure had not disputed the loan disbursements, security documents or repayment default. Its financial statements also continued to acknowledge the outstanding liability.
“In our view, there exists a debt which is in default and the said debt is within limitation and exceeds the threshold prescribed under Section 4 of IBC, 2016,” the bench observed.
The NCLT clarified that it had not finally “crystallised” the exact amount payable. The outstanding dues will be examined and determined by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) during the insolvency resolution process.
Source: The Free Press Journal
