Case Study

THE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

Successful Insolvency Resolution of Rite Builtec

Private Limited
Rite Builtec Private Ltd., the Corporate Debtor (CD),
Case study
along with Rite Developers Private Ltd. (Co-Borrower) Resolution of Rite Builtec Private Limited

secured ₹60 Crores credit facility in 2018 from Piramal

Capital & Housing Finance Ltd. (PCHFL), erstwhile
DHFL, for development of Mahakali Nagar CHS Slum
Project in Mumbai. However, the CD soon landed into
a financial crisis which led to the commencement of its
CIRP via an NCLT order dated August 25, 2023.
The multiplicity of stakeholders including over 750 slum
dwellers were main hurdles in the successful resolution
of the CD. However, transparent dialogue and proactive
engagement by the RP were instrumental in addressing
concerns, mitigating conflicts, and maintaining trust of
stakeholders. Finally, the CD was revolved through a
Resolution Plan amounting ₹37 crores plus rent to be paid
to the eligible slum dwellers as determined by the Slum
Redevelopment Authority (SRA), Mumbai. Thus, the value
of Resolution Plan is over 150% of the liquidation value of
the CD, which would be even higher if the rent to be paid
by the SRA to the eligible slum dwellers is considered. In
Successful Insolvency Resolution
addition to that the transaction audit uncovered PUFE
of Rite Builtec Private Limited
transactions exceeding ₹60 Crores, which, if clawed back
would further enhance the recovery. JUlY
In the present case study, Mr. Amit Karia, the RP of the 2025
CD, has highlighted the challenges faced during the
resolution of Rite Builtec Private Ltd and the measures he 1. Introduction
adopted to conclude the resolution.
Rite Builtec Private Ltd. (Rite Builtec) is a company
Read on to know more…
incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, with
specialization in residential construction and real estate
development. The company focused on redevelopment
projects of Slum Rehabilitation Authority, Mumbai
(Authority).
Rite Builtec, the Corporate Debtor (CD), along with
its parent company Rite Developers Private Ltd. (Co-
Borrower / Rite Developers), sought financial assistance
from the lender Piramal Capital & Housing Finance Ltd.
(PCHFL), formerly, Dewan Housing Finance Corporation
Ltd. (DHFL) to develop a Slum Rehabilitation Project
Amit Karia namely “Mahakali Nagar CHS Slum Project” (the
The author is Insolvency Project) at Magathane, Devipada, Borivali, Mumbai
Professional (IP) Member of IIIPI. (Maharashtra). While Rite Developers had multiple
He can be reached at: projects across Mumbai’s western suburbs - including
ipamitkaria@[Link] Rite Aspire, Rite Celesta, Rite Skyluxe, Rite Divine,
Rite Advent, Rite Bliss, Rite Luxuria, Rite Perinto, and

JULY 2025 39 [Link]

 Case Study
THE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

others while Mahakali Nagar CHS Slum Project under the (d) Preferential, Undervalued, Fraudulent, and
Authority was the sole project of Rite Builtec. Extortionate (PUFE) Transactions: The
transaction audit uncovered PUFE transactions
To fund the project, the company secured ₹60 Crores exceeding ₹60 Crores, which severely impacted the
credit facility, of which ₹52.25 Crores were disbursed. company’s financial position. These transactions
However, financial distress emerged when the company involved related-party dealings, fund siphoning, and
defaulted on its first payment on July 11, 2018, failing to mismanagement, leading to a significant liquidity
pay the pre-equated monthly instalment (PEMI) interest. crunch.
Subsequent defaults followed, with non-payment of
monthly interest from April 2019 onwards. As a result, Additionally, Rite Developers Private Ltd., the parent
PCHFL in its capacity of financial creditor filed a petition company of Rite Builtec, was found to have over 60 bank
under Section 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, accounts with multiple banks and was also undergoing
2016 (IBC) before the NCLT, Mumbai. The Adjudicating CIRP with admitted debts exceeding ₹1,500 Crores.
Authority (AA) admitted Rite Builtec into the Corporate The final Transaction Audit Report presented conclusive
Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) on August 25, evidence of financial misconduct, highlighting:
2023.
(i) Fraudulent diversion of loan funds.
2. Reasons that lead to initiation of CIRP (ii) Preferential transactions favouring specific creditors
and related parties.
The reasons that lead to financial crisis of the CD and (iii) Multiple violations of the provisions of the IBC.
initiation of the CIRP are as under:

(a) Failure to Pay Monthly Interest & Principal: The

CD defaulted on its loan obligations starting in July The findings of the Transaction Audit
2018, initially failing to pay the PEMI interest. From Report became key legal evidence
April 2019 onwards, there were continuous defaults in proceedings against the former
on monthly interest payments, leading to a severe directors and associated entities,
financial crisis. further strengthening the case
(b) Project Delays & Execution Challenges: Project
for financial mismanagement and
faced significant execution delays, affecting both
insolvency.
revenue generation and financial viability.
The findings of the Transaction Audit Report
(c) Denial of Additional Funding: The lender, PCHFL, became key legal evidence in proceedings against
refused further disbursements due to non-compliance the former directors and associated entities, further
with loan terms. Key reasons for this decision strengthening the case for financial mismanagement
included: and insolvency.
(i) Misuse of Loan Funds: The CD failed to utilize the 3. Challenges during the CIRP
sanctioned loan amount for project development.
(a) Violation of Moratorium by Suspended
(ii) Diversion of Funds: Financial transactions revealed Directors: The suspended directors of Rite
the diversion of funds to related parties, raising Builtec continued to conduct unauthorized
concerns over financial mismanagement. transactions through the bank accounts of
(iii) Non-Maintenance of Escrow Account: A the CD even after CIRP was initiated, till the
mandatory escrow account for fund management was debit freeze was imposed & the change of
not maintained, which violated key loan conditions. signatory was updated by the banks. Despite the
(iv) Unauthorized Loan Repayments: The company
moratorium, funds were diverted, complicating
repaid unsecured loans without obtaining prior
the financial situation and raising legal concerns.
approval from its lenders thereby breaching financial
Urgent applications had to be filed by the Resolution
Professional (RP) with the AA.
agreements.
(b) Non-existent registered office: The registered office

JULY 2025 40 [Link]

 Case Study
THE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

of the CD as per the records of Ministry of Corporate led to significant delays in conducting the resolution
Affairs (MCA) was non-existent. The premises were process. Post vacation of the court-stay and dismissal
owned and occupied by some other entity, unrelated of the appeal, the CoC was constituted and the
to the CD. first CoC meeting was held in November 2023.
(c) Absence of Essential Financial Records: The On November 23, 2023, the Interim Resolution
company’s books of accounts, balance sheets, and Professional (IRP) was confirmed as the Resolution
financial records & registers were missing and Professional (RP) by the CoC. Subsequently, an
not even a single document was received from the application was filed before the NCLT, Mumbai for
erstwhile management. The Section 19(2) application exclusion of the time lost due to stay imposed by the
against the suspended directors did not help in any NCLAT. The NCLT allowed the exclusion of 54 days
manner. The RP faced challenges in reconciling from the CIRP of the CD.
debts and verifying creditor claims due to the lack of (f) Agitated Slum Dwellers' Intrusion & Protests: The
proper documentation. The CIRP was run by the RP stalled project at Devipada had been incomplete for
with no books, registers, records, documents at all, around 15 years, leaving 750+ slum dwellers in the
except those publicly available. lurch. Some of these affected slum dwellers stormed
(d) Difficulty in valuation of ‘Land and Building’: into the RP’s office, demanding clarification on
Though the registered valuers were appointed within their pending homes and unpaid rent compensation.
the timelines prescribed under the IBC, but in the The RP had to engage with local authorities and
absence of project related documents, there was a law enforcement agencies to ensure the safety of
lot of difficulty in undertaking the valuation exercise office staff and maintain order while addressing
in relation to the project of the CD. The RP had to the grievances of slum dwellers. Subsequently, a
explain and convince the Committee of Creditors series of meetings were held regularly with the slum
(CoC) to grant the approval for a third-party agency dwellers at the project site to bring a humane touch
to be appointed to do the project appraisal and share to the process by explaining them the various steps of
the detailed project appraisal report, which was the process in simple terms and assured to keep them
then provided to the registered valuers as a base for informed at each stage.
their valuation exercise. The appraisal evaluated (g) Threats from Local and Other Interest Groups:
the financial viability, regulatory compliance, Various local groups and vested interest parties
construction timelines, and the overall infrastructure began interfering with the resolution process, seeking
impact. Multiple site visits were conducted with the control over the project. The RP faced direct threats
team of the project appraisal agency, based on which and acts of intimidation, resulting in a hostile and
the report was prepared & submitted. unsafe working environment. To safeguard the
process and ensure that the RP could discharge his
duties without external pressure, the matter was
brought to the attention of local police authorities.
The CIRP commenced on August 25, 2023,
Following visits to the concerned police stations
but on an appeal filed by the suspended
and necessary briefings, the police authorities were
directors, the NCLAT imposed a stay on
requested to maintain order and provide necessary
September 14, which continued for almost
protection.
two months.
(h) Unauthorized Constructions at the Project Site:
In the first week of September 2024, several illegal
(e) NCLAT-Imposed Stay on CIRP: The CIRP structures were erected at the project site. The CoC
commenced on August 25, 2023, but due to an was promptly informed via email, accompanied by
appeal filed by the suspended directors, the National images of the structures. On September 20, 2024, the
Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) imposed RP visited the local police station and the Authority
a stay on September 14, 2023, which continued for to report these developments and request necessary
almost two months up to November 06, 2023. This actions against the illegal constructions. There was
no security deployment at the project site, since there

JULY 2025 41 [Link]

 Case Study
THE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

were no funds available with the RP and the CoC as per Regulation 33(10) of the DCPR 2034, facilitating
did not grant the necessary approvals for security both rehabilitation housing for slum dwellers and saleable
deployment. Even the resolution for raising interim residential units. The project requires approvals from
finance was discussed in detail but ultimately rejected Authority, MHADA, Municipal Corporation of Greater
by the CoC. Mumbai (MCGM), Maharashtra Pollution Control Board
(MPCB), Chief Fire Officer (CFO), Airport Authority of
India (AAI), and State Environment Impact Assessment
Assignment of debt by PCHFL Authority (SEIAA), among others. Certain approvals,
in favour of Omkara Assets including environmental clearance and building layout
Reconstruction Private Ltd. led to plans, are still pending.
reconstitution of the CoC to reflect the
4.1 Complicated History of the Project
change in creditor composition.
The project has undergone a complex and lengthy legal
process, involving multiple developers, agreements, and
(i) Frivolous Applications Filed by Vested Interests: approvals. Initially, on May 9, 2005, a Development
Entities with hidden agendas filed baseless Agreement was signed between M/s Nagji Motiji & Co.
applications before the AA especially when the (Landowners) and M/s Amogh Enterprises (Developers),
resolution plan application was about to be reserved granting development rights. This was followed by a
for orders. These attempts were apparently made Joint Venture Agreement on February 6, 2010, between
to derail the CIRP and delay the approval of the M/s Amogh Enterprises and M/s Nirman Developers,
resolution plan. effectively adding a co-developer. To confirm these
arrangements, a Deed of Confirmation was executed on
(j) Assignment of Debt by the sole CoC member: the same day among M/s Nagji Motiji & Co., M/s Amogh
There was assignment of debt by PCHFL in favour of Enterprises, and M/s Nirman Developers.
Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd. (OARPL)
The assignment agreement was executed on February Following these legal agreements, the project obtained
13, 2024, but the RP was informed about the same official approvals. The Authority issued an original
on February 26, 2024, by the assignor & assignee. Letter of Intent (LoI) on December 16, 2010, in favour
This transfer of debt ownership led to complexities of Architect Sanjay Neve, M/s Amogh Enterprises, and
in the resolution process, impacting the composition the Mahakali Nagar Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd.
and decision-making of the CoC. This transition led Shortly thereafter, the housing society was officially
to reconstitution of the CoC to reflect the change in registered on October 4, 2011, under the Maharashtra
creditor composition. The necessary application was Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960. In the following
filed by the RP with the AA to bring on record the months, M/s Amogh Enterprises secured an Intimation
revised list of creditors and reconstitution of the CoC. of Approval (IOA) from the Authority on November 24,
\4. Synopsis of the project 2011, and “Consent to Establish” from the Maharashtra
Pollution Control Board (MPCB) on December 1, 2011,
The Mahakali Nagar CHS Slum Project (the project) allowing the project to move forward.
has been Authority’s redevelopment project located in
Devipada. It involved a Joint Development Agreement Over time, the project saw the entry of additional
between the CD and two other developers, M/s Amogh developers. On January 28, 2013, a Joint Venture
Enterprises and M/s GSP Developers. The total plot area Agreement was signed between M/s Amogh Enterprises
comprises 9,675.20 square meters of privately owned land, and M/s GSP Developers, introducing another partner.
along with an additional 3,000 square meters of land under This led to a Revised Letter of Intent (LoI) being issued
Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority on July 8, 2015, in favor of the original developers and the
(MHADA). This land has been earmarked for Authority housing society. By August 3, 2016, a Memorandum of
for redevelopment project, aimed at providing housing to Understanding (MOU) was executed between M/s Amogh
displaced residents while also allowing for commercial Enterprises, M/s GSP Developers, and Rite Developers
and residential development. The development is planned Private Ltd., bringing in yet another development entity.

JULY 2025 42 [Link]

 Case Study
THE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

However, a year later, on August 3, 2017, a supplementary projects in Mumbai, where land ownership, legal rights,
MOU was signed in which Rite Developers Private Ltd. and project execution often undergo extensive negotiations
exited, and Rite Builtec Private Ltd. stepped in as the new before reaching finalization.
developer. 5. Claims filed and Admitted Claims
Subsequently, General Body of the housing society The RP received the total claim amounting about ₹172
passed a resolution on September 10, 2017, formally crores out of which approximately ₹153 crores were
appointing Rite Builtec as the project’s new developer. admitted which comprised of Secured Financial Creditors
However, the legal restructuring continued. On March (SFCs), Operational Creditors (OCs) and Other Creditors.
31, 2018, a Cancellation Deed was executed between M/s
Nagji Motiji & Co., M/s Amogh Enterprises, and M/s The “Other Creditors” involved the unpaid rent arrears
Nirman Developers, effectively terminating their earlier
agreements. That same day, a Deed of Conveyance cum The RP received the total claim
Joint Development Agreement was signed, officially amounting about ₹172 crores out of
transferring the development rights from M/s Nagji Motiji which approximately ₹153 crores were
& Co. to Rite Builtec Private Ltd., with M/s Amogh admitted.
Enterprises and M/s GSP Developers listed as confirming
parties.
due and payable to the eligible slum dwellers of the
Despite these transitions, legal challenges persisted. On project. Since very limited information was available,
June 15, 2020, an order was passed under Section 13(2) the RP admitted the amount to the extent of ₹14,500 per
of Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance month for 551 eligible slum dwellers (out of total 750+
and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 against M/s Amogh slum dwellers) for the period of 52 months and 24 days
Enterprises. An order Section 13(2) order under the for which the rent was unpaid on the part of the CD. The
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and claim was admitted as ‘Contingent Claim’ and under the
Redevelopment) Act, 1971, is an order issued by the Chief head ‘Other Creditors’.
Executive Officer (CEO) of the Authority when a slum The determination of the eligibility of slum dwellers to
redevelopment project is not being carried out as per the receive rent falls within the purview of the Authority. The
approved scheme or within the specified time. It allows the initial number of eligible beneficiaries was derived from
Authority to intervene and redevelop the land, potentially the original Letter of Intent (LoI) issued in connection
terminating the original developer and appointing a new with the project. Upon issuance of a fresh Letter of
one to ensure timely project completion. Thus, the order Intent (LoI) and the appointment of a new developer,
marked the end of M/s Amogh Enterprises’ involvement the Authority is expected to undertake a re-verification
in the project, leaving ‘Rite Builtec Private Ltd.’ as the process to determine the final number of eligible slum
sole developer. dwellers. Given that only limited documentation was
available in support of the claim, the RP, exercising
The legal battles, regulatory hurdles, and multiple shifts abundant caution. Besides, a disclaimer was used in the
regarding control on development on this project, highlight email acknowledging the claim that “admission of the
the complexities associated with slum redevelopment above amount of claim by the RP does not guarantee
Table 1: Claims received and Admitted by the RP

Category of Claimants Claims Received in ₹ Claims Admitted in ₹

Secured Financial Creditors (SFCs) 1,05,36,59,153 1,05,36,59,153

Operational Creditors (OCs) 5,62,80,240 5,62,80,240

Other Creditors 61,00,00,000 42,16,39,419

Total 171,99,39,393 153,15,78,812

JULY 2025 43 [Link]

 Case Study
THE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

or imply that the amount would be paid to the eligible proposed for improvement of business operation
members. The actual payment depends upon whether within the first 12 months after approval of resolution
there is any resolution plan by the resolution applicant, plan by the NCLT.
which is approved by the Committee of Creditors & then d. Net Present Value of future cash recovery to the
by the Hon’ble NCLT, Mumbai. Hence, the payment & SFCs.
the quantum thereof is contingent in nature.”
e. Payment to other stakeholders such as Operational
6. Expressions of Interest (EoI) and Approval Creditors, Other Creditors, Government Dues,
of Resolution Plan Employees, Workmen etc.
During the CIRP of Rite Builte, multiple “Form G” f. Financial strength of Resolution Applicant / Group
publications were required due to various challenges (Applicant Net Worth, Group Net Worth, revenue of
faced in attracting viable resolution applicants. The first the Group and EBIDTA of the Group), Experience of
“Form G” was issued on January 10, 2024, inviting Resolution Applicant.
Expressions of Interest (EoI) from Potential Resolution g. Group in Real Estate Sector in which CD is engaged,
Applicants (PRAs). However, due to limited response and tenure of completion of development.
delay in process, a first addendum was issued on January
29, 2024, followed by a second addendum on March 6.2. Voting on Resolution Plan
1, 2024, extending deadlines and modifying eligibility
criteria to encourage broader participation. Despite these Eventually, the CoC voted in favour of the Resolution
efforts, the initial round of resolution plans was found Plan submitted by “Aspect Global Ventures Private Ltd.”
to be unsatisfactory, leading to the rejection by the CoC which obtained a scoring of 84 marks out of 100, against
of two resolution plans in July 2024 - one from “Oberoi 48 marks and 32 marks of the other two resolution plans.
Realty Ltd.” and the other one from “Ashdan Properties The resolution applicant Aspect Global Ventures Private
Private Ltd.”. Consequently, a fresh “Form G” was issued Ltd. was declared as the Successful Resolution Applicant
on July 10, 2024, initiating a second round of invitation (SRA), and a Letter of Intent (LoI) was issued by the RP,
for resolution plans. This reissuance resulted in the immediately post declaration of the voting result.
participation of several resolution applicants, with final
The Resolution Plan was approved unanimously by the
time to submit revised resolution plans being given to
CoC with 100% voting share. The resolution applicant
five resolution applicants out of which three resolution
had confirmed its eligibility under Section 29A of the
applicants submitted their revised proposals while one
IBC, ensuring compliance with all statutory requirements.
of them continued with his originally submitted plan.
An external agency, appointed with the CoC’s approval,
Subsequently, one resolution applicant withdrew from the
also conducted a due diligence exercise to verify and
process and accordingly, three resolution plans were put
confirm the applicant’s eligibility. The electronic voting
for voting before the CoC. They are as under:
results on the Resolution Plan were published on October
a. Romell Real Estate Private Ltd. 21, 2024, and the application for approval of Resolution
b. LJK Construction India Private Ltd. in consortium Plan was promptly filed with the NCLT on October 23,
with Evanka Construction India Private Ltd. and 2024, which received AA’s approval on January 16, 2025.
Arpit Rastogi. The RP went out of the way to ensure that valuable time
in the process is saved, and the entity is revived without
c. Aspect Global Ventures Private Ltd. any further delay.
6.1. Key Parameters of the Evaluation Matrix The Application for approval of Resolution Plan
filed by the RP on October 23, 2024, was heard at
A detailed discussion ensued in the CoC meeting for length by the AA across five hearings including
voting on resolution plans, including the following key clarification sought. Thereafter, the Plan approval
parameters of the Evaluation Matrix: application was ‘Reserved for Orders’. The final
a. Upfront Cash Payment to the SFCs. order for approval of the Resolution Plan application
was passed on January 16, 2025, whereas the order
b. Tenure of upfront cash payment to the SFCs. copy was received on January 17, 2025.
c. Fresh fund in the form of equity / quasi-equity

JULY 2025 44 [Link]

 Case Study
THE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

Table 2: Relevant timelines relating to the approval of Resolution Plan

Sr. Particulars Date

1 Date of the 14th (Fourteenth) CoC meeting (for voting on resolution

16.10.2024
plans)

2 Date of circulation of minutes of the meeting 16.10.2024

3 E-Voting Start Date 16.10.2024

4 E-Voting End Date 21.10.2024

5 Issue of Letter of Intent to the SRA by the RP 21.10.2024

6 Receipt of Countersigned LoI and Performance Security from the SRA 23.10.2024

Filing of the Application before NCLT for approval of resolution plan by

7 23.10.2024
the RP

7. Outlay under the Resolution Plan and under the Resolution Plan. Of this, an upfront amount of
Implementation ₹3.50 crores was deposited by the SRA as “Performance
Security Deposit” in form of refundable “Fixed Deposit”
As per the approved Resolution Plan, the total resolution
amount stood at ₹37 crores plus amounts payable to the which was to be paid to the CoC post approval of the
eligible slum dwellers of project, as may be determined Resolution Plan by the AA. In the event the Resolution
by the Authority. The specific amount of such rent arrears Plan was rejected, the secured deposit would be refunded
has not been included within the Resolution Plan as it back to the Resolution Applicant. The remaining balance
remains currently undetermined and shall be finalized by of ₹32.50 crores was to be paid upon the approval of the
the Authority. Resolution Plan by the AA.
The implementation of the Resolution Plan followed
a structured timeline. Upon the AA’s approval, a
The resolution plan value is more than Monitoring Committee was formed within 15 days,
150% of the liquidation value, which which comprised of One Representative of the CoC /
would be even higher if the rent to be SFC, Two Representatives of the SRA, and Erstwhile
paid by the SRA to the eligible slum RP as the Managing Agent. The operations of the
dwellers is considered. CD were handed over to the Monitoring Committee
and, to ensure the effective implementation of the
The fair value of the CD (for land and building with resolution plan, the committee was tasked with
securities or financial assets) had been estimated at ₹38.89 overseeing its execution and submitting quarterly
crores, while its liquidation value was ₹24.42 crores. reports. The SRA subsequently infused the balance
Hence, the Resolution Plan value is more than 150% of amount, in addition to the earlier deposit of ₹3.50
the liquidation value, which would be even higher if the crores. The balance amount was allocated towards
rent to be paid by the SRA to the eligible slum dwellers the CIRP costs and other financial outlays as
is considered. The SFC, being the sole member of the stipulated in the Resolution Plan. Following this,
CoC, was offered a total consideration of ₹36 crores the CD’s Board of Directors was reconstituted, and

JULY 2025 45 [Link]

 Case Study
THE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

a selective capital reduction was implemented in Consequently, an addendum to the Resolution Plan was
accordance with the approved Plan. approved in the 16th CoC meeting on January 8, 2025,
confirming that the SRA would be responsible for settling
The approval order stated that the Plan complied
the outstanding rent arrears, as and when determined by
with Section 30(2) of the IBC, and Regulations 37,
the Authority. It was also undertaken by the SRA that they
38, 38(1A), and 39(4) of the CIRP Regulations. The
shall unconditionally pay the amount as determined and
AA had emphasized that the statutory obligations
directed by the Authority within the time specified by the
of the CD remained unaffected, and all claims not
Authority or 90 days of the determination, whichever is
included in the Resolution Plan stood extinguished.
earlier. In this manner, the AA attempted to reconcile the
The moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC ceased
objectives of the IBC and a welfare legislation like the
to be in effect from the approval date.
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971.
8. Issue relating to Rent Arrears due to slum
dwellers 9. Conclusion
A significant issue raised during the AA’s review and The successful resolution of Rite Builtec reaffirms
consideration was the payment of rent arrears to the slum the effectiveness of India’s insolvency framework in
dwellers, a condition imposed by the Authority in its balancing creditor interests with economic revival. The
original Letter of Intent (LoI). Since the Resolution Plan resolution underscores the critical role of open and constant
was silent on this matter, the AA first directed the RP to communication by the RP with various stakeholders in
submit an additional affidavit having an undertaking by navigating the complexities of the CIRP. Throughout the
the SRA to unconditionally pay the amount as may be process, the RP had to engage with multiple stakeholders,
determined by the Authority. After the needful was done, including financial creditors, operational creditors,
the AA had taken the undertaking on record and reserved regulatory authorities, slum dwellers, the Authority and
the Plan application for order. Subsequently, the matter local interest groups. Transparent dialogue and proactive
was called for clarification, and the RP was directed to engagement were instrumental in addressing concerns,
get an addendum to the Resolution Plan from the SRA, mitigating conflicts, and maintaining trust in the resolution
get it approved by the CoC and then file with the AA. process.

JULY 2025 46 [Link]