FORM CA

SUBMISSION OF CLAIM BY FINANCIAL CREDITORS IN A CLASS

(Under Regulation 8Aof the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Insolvency Resolution Process for
Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016)
[Date]
From
Ms. PritiGera,
C-572, Sector 15A,
Faridabad, 121007

To
The Interim Resolution Professional
Shyam Arora
96, Aravali Apartment, Alaknanda, New Delhi-110019
Email: arora.shyaam@yahoo.com

Subject: Submission of claim and proof of claim.

Madam/Sir,

I, PritiGera, hereby submits this claim in respect of the corporate insolvency resolution
process of SRS Real Estate Ltd. The details for the same are set out below:
RELEVANT PARTICULARS
1. Name of the Mrs. PritiGera
financial
creditor
2. Identificatio Mrs. PritiGera, W/o Krishan Lal Gera
n number of
the financial
creditor PAN:----------
(If an
incorporate
d body,
provide
identificatio
n number
and proof of
incorporatio
n. If a
partnership
or
individual,
provide
identificatio
n records of
all the
 partners or
the
individual)
3. Address and ADDRESS: C-572, Sector 15A, Faridabad, 121007
e-mail
address of
the financial Email: krishangera34@gmail.com
creditor for
corresponde
nce.
4. Total (i) Amount Paid:Rs. 58,00,000/-
amount of (ii) Interest @ 8% on refund calculated from the respective dates of
claim (in deposit Rs. 38,13,763/-
Rs.)
Total Claim [(i)+(ii)]= 
Rs.96,13,763

5. Details of 1. Payment Receipts issued by SRS Real Estate Ltd.

documents 2. Security Receipt of Rs. 57, 81,000/-
by reference 3. A BBA/ Allotment Letter dated 11.12.2015.
to which the 4. Allotment Letter
debt can be 5. A copy of SMS or message chat
substantiate 6. Reminder Letter Dated 05.06.2018
7. Legal Notice Dated 14.06.2018
d
8. Latest Pictures of the Project
9. Complaint filed at Police station, Faridabad
6. Details of
how and 1. That the Claimant is law abiding citizen of India and is resident of
when debt 572, Sector-15A, Faridabad, Haryana-121007 having no knowledge
incurred
about the real estate sector.

2. That the Respondent is a company incorporated under the Companies

Act, 1956 having its registered office at SRS Tower, 730,732, 7th
Floor, Near Metro Station Mewla Maharajpur, G.T. Road, Faridabad-
121003 and is engaged in the business of developing real estate
projects.That the Respondent proposed to develop a Group Housing
Residential project in the name and style of “SRS Royal Hills, Phase
2” (hereinafter to be referred as“Project”) at Sector-87, Faridabad.
3. It is pertinent to mention that the Respondent in order to lure the
Claimant displayed lavish and luxurious project layouts, posters and
plans which eventually made the Claimant to invest into the project
which was supposedly to be developed by the Respondent in the year
2015 and the Respondent conducted a high level fancy advertisements
to portray that the project which is being developed by him is genuine
and worth investing. The Respondent further claimed in the layout
plans mentioned in BBA that it shall provide luxury living experience
to the Claimant by offering facilities like beautiful landscape
complex, walkways and sit-outs, dedicated parking, play zone for
children, 100% power backup, shopping malls, academic and health
care facilities nearby, clubbed with swimming pool, gym, table tennis,
air hockey etc.
4. That the Claimant was lured by the misleading representations and
false assurances made by the Respondent, decided to invest her life-
long savings and hard earned money in the Project of the Respondent.

5. That, on 11.12.2015, the Claimant made an upfront payment of Rs.

58,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Eight Lacs), in favour of the Respondent by
way of cash, which was duly acknowledged by the Respondent as
follows:

DETAILS OF AMOUNT PAID BY THE CLAIMANT TO THE

RESPONDENT:

Amount Date of Mode of Proof of Payment

Paid Payment Payment

Rs. 11.12.2015 By Cash 1. Receipt of Rs. 19000/- dated 11.12.2015

58,00,000/- 2. Security Deposit Receipt of Rs. 57,81,0
dated 11.12.2015
 Copies of the Receipts are annexed herewith as Annexure C/1.

6. That it clarified that the payment of an amount of Rs. 19,000/- was

acknowledged by the Respondent as booking amount. However, the
remaining amount of Rs. 57,81,000/-, the Respondent termed the
same as a Security Loan and gave a Security Deposit Receipt to the
Claimant. It is humbly submitted in the Security Deposit Receipt it is
clearly mentioned that till the repayment of the aforesaid loan,
Respondent will pay an interest of 2% per month to the Claimant.
Further, in case the Respondent fails to repay the said loan amount
within 12 months plus a grace period of 6 months from the date of
execution of the receipt, then the loan amount shall be treated as a
part-payment against the total sale consideration of Rs. 80,60,500/-
(Rupees Eighty Lacs Sixty Thousand and Five Hundred Only), for the
Flat no. 607, Tower No. E1, 6 the Floor admeasuring 1715 sq. ft. of
sale area. Further, the Claimant will become the absolute owner of the
Unit. The relevant portion of the said receipt is reproduced below:

“Till repayment of aforesaid loan, company shall

pay interest @2%(two percent) per month as
aforesaid loan to Miss Priti on monthly basis by the
7th day of succeeding month. Claim for non-receipt
of interest for any month can be raised by Miss
Priti within 7 days of aforesaid due date failing
which it will be deemed that interest has been paid.
In case company fails to repay the aforesaid loan
within 12 (twelve months) plus a grace period of 6
months from the date of execution of the receipt,
then the loan amount shall be treated as
consideration for the aforesaid flat and he shall
become the owner of the flat in accordance with
the terms and conditions of the Flat Buyer
 Agreement….sale.”

7. Therefore, it can be inferred from the above terms of the receipt that
after the expiry of the aforesaid period, the amount of Rs. 57,81,000/-
will be treated as the consideration towards the purchase of the said
unit and the Claimant will be treated as the owner of the unit.

8. That on paying the abovementioned amount and to provide security to

the Claimant on 11.12.2015 itself, an Allotment Letter in the form of
Builder- Buyer Agreement (hereinafter referred to as “BBA”) was
executed between the Claimant and the Respondent, whereby, the
Claimant was allotted Flat no. 607, Tower No. E1, 6 th Floor
admeasuring 1715 sq. ft. of sale area (hereinafter referred to as
“Unit”).
(A true copy of Allotment Letter/Agreement is annexed
herewith as Annexure-C/2).

9. It is pertinent to note that the Respondent further assured the Claimant

that the project would be delivered to the Claimant within the
stipulated time of 4 years from the date of execution of the BBA.
Furthermore, as per clause 4.1 of the BBA, the possession of the unit
was to be handed over to the claimant by10.12.2019. However, no
possession was delivered as mentioned in the Agreement. It is
submitted that there has been no event of unforeseen circumstances or
force majeure which may have delayed delivery of possession. Clause
4.1 is reproduced herein as follow:
“4.1 Subject to clauses 1.23, 4.2 and 13 herein
……………the seller proposes to handover the
possession of the said flat, to the purchaser
within a period of four years from the date of
execution of this agreement. The seller shall
give Notice of Possession to the
purchaser…………………………..cost of the
 purchaser”

10. That it is submitted here that, as per reports and newspaper articles the
Respondent has already taken a loan of Rs. 140 crore from L.I.C.
Housing Finance Ltd., Delhi by mortgaging 612 flats of the Project.
That despite taking such huge loan amounts from financial
institutions, the Respondent lured innocent allottees to paying their
hard-earned monies to the Respondent with the promised that they
will return the amounts within one year or the allotment of a Unit in
the Project (which was initially provided as a security) will become
absolute. It is humbly submitted that such tactics of the Respondent,to
take such large amount of money from the Claimant and other
allottees for the development of its Project, clearly shows that the
Claimant just wanted to fraudulently and illegally extract money and
thereby commit fraud without actually having the intention to fulfill
its part of the promise as per the BBA.

11. It is pertinent to mention herein that as per the agreed terms of the
Security Deposit Receipt, the Respondent failed to repay the amounts
within a period of one year thereby the allotment of the Unit to the
Claimant became absolute.

12. That it is pertinent to note that the developer being in a dominant

position included various one sided clauses in the BBA, though
claiming it to be a standard agreement. That Claimant having no other
option or a choice for making any equitable change therein, was
forced to sign the one-sided and biased BBA.

13. It is apropos to mention here that the clause 1.14 of the BBA entitled
the Respondent to charge 18% p.a. of the interest in case of delay in
making the payments upto 3 months and thereafter at the rate 24%
p.a. by the Claimant, however, clause 5 of the BBA restricts the
Claimant from claiming any damages or compensation from the
 Respondent for delay in handing over of possession. There is a huge
discrimination in the remedies available to the Claimant and the
Respondent under the Allotment Letter and the BBA.

The relevant clause from the BBA is reproduced herein below:

“5.1 Seller shall not be liable to pay any
compensation, interest or penalty to Purchaser in
case of any delay at the end of the Seller in
completion of construction of said flat or in case of
delay in offer of possession of the said flat.
5.2 The Purchaser has fully understood that if due to
any reason whatsoever the whole or any part of the
project is abandoned or the completion of the project
is abnormally delayed due to any reason except the
circumstances mentioned in the clauses 1.23, 4.2
and 13, the only responsibility and liability of the
seller will be refund to the Purchaser the total
amount received by the seller in respect of the said
flat till the time without any interest whatsoever. In
such…………………………..otherwise”

14. That, as mentioned above that the terms and conditions of the
Allotment letter/BBA are illegal, unfair, unreasonable and one sided
and a perusal of the clauses shows the stark incongruities on the
remedy available to the Claimant and the Respondent. The
Respondent compelled the Claimant to abide the terms of the
Allotment Letter/ Agreement having arbitrary terms and conditions
wherein it is clearly mentioned that in case of failure to give the
timely possession, the Respondent shall not be liable to any
compensation penalty or interest which is totally unfair, one-sided and
is not even binding on the allottee.

15. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has laid down in various
judgments that the courts will have power to strike down the
contract/agreement having arbitrary and one-sided terms and
conditions. As per the Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India in the Case of “Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure
Ltd. Vs. Govindan Raghavan, Civil Appeal 12238 of 2018, it was
held that Builder could not seek to bind the purchaser with such one-
sided contractual terms.
The relevant paras from the judgementare as follows:
“A term of contract will not be final and binding if it
is shown that the flat purchaser had no option but
to sign on the dotted line, on a contract framed by
the Builder. The contractual terms of the
agreement dated 08.05.2012 are ex-facie one-sided,
unfair and unreasonable. The incorporation of
such one-sided clauses in an agreement constitutes
an unfair trade practice as per Section 2(1) (r) of
the consumer protection act, 1986 since it adopts
unfair methods and practices for the purpose of
selling the flats by the Builder.”

In the matter of (In Central Inland Water Transport

Corporation Limited and Ors. Vs. Brojo Nath Ganguly
and Ors., 1986)3SCC 156, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held
that:

“89. ….. Our Judges are bound by their

oath to uphold the Constitution and the
laws’………………………………This
principle is that the courts will not enforce
and will, when called upon to do so, strike
down an unfair and unreasonable contract,
or an unfair and unreasonable clause in a
contract, entered inti between parties who
 are not equal in bargaining
power………………..The court must judge
each case on its own facts and
circumstances.”

16. The Allotment Letter/ Agreement is biased and one sided. It does not
specify anywhere that in case the Respondent Company fails to
deliver the timely possession of the unit, the Buyer/Claimant have the
right to seek refund the entire amount without any forfeiture. The
Respondent has nowhere mentioned any remedial measures to be
taken in case of deficiency or failure of services.
17. That suddenly the news of misdeeds by the Respondent were
highlighted in News Channels and social media and the same came to
the knowledge of the Claimant. Thereafter, the Claimant inquired and
came to know that number of complaints of cheating, fraud and
misappropriation were filed against the Directors of M/s SRS Real
Estate Ltd. Further, it also came to the knowledge of the Claimant that
multiple cases were already registered against the Respondent for
committed similar acts of cheating and fraud with various allottees by
adopting the same practice as in the case of the Claimant.

18. That on receiving the abovementioned news, the Claimant’s father

immediately approached the Directors of the Respondent’s company
i.e., Mr. Anil Jindle and others through various modes like SMS,
WhatsApp messages, calls but theDirectors of the Respondent again
gave a false hope and promise that either they will manage to get all
the requisite permissions from the Competent Authorities or they will
return the amount to the Claimant along with interest. The Claimant
again falling prey to the false averments and promises of the
Respondent and with the fear of losing her hard-earned money gave
one more chance to the Respondent to make the payments of the
amounts received from the Claimant with interest.
19. It is also pertinent to mention here that one of the Directors i.e., Mr.
Anil Jindle sent a SMS dated 13.07.2017 and 29.07.2017 wherein he
admitted the liability and promised to refund the amount invested by
the Claimant.

A copy of the SMS messages is annexed herewith as Annexure-

C/3

20. That after few days, it came to the knowledge of the Claimant that the
permissions obtained by the Respondent for the construction &
development of the Project was illegally obtained by concealing the
material facts and was in connivance with the local administration.
Therefore, the same were cancelled by the appropriate Government
Authority. Thereafter, the Claimant again called the Respondent in
order to demand the refund ofher hard-earned money along with
interest from the Respondent. However, the Respondent again tries to
mislead the Claimant by offering an alternative Unit which was
previously mortgaged to some other party and thereby again trying
tocommit afraud against her.

21. That the Claimant has been in regular compliance of the terms and
conditions of the BBA. Also, despite paying a huge amount of Rs.
58,00,000/- towards the total sale consideration, the Respondent again
sent a payment demand letter on 05.06.2018 in order to extract money
from the Claimant whereas the status of construction of the Project
was negligible and in a dismal state.
A copy of the demand letter dated 05.06.2018 is annexed herein
as Annexure- C/4

22. That in reply to the demand letter dated 05.06.2018, the Claimant sent
a legal notice dated 14.06.2018 wherein the Claimant clearly stated
that the true facts that the Claimant has already paid a huge amount
towards the consideration of the said unit in form of cash and in return
of the same, the Respondent has neither given the possession of the
said unit to the Claimant nor refund the amount and thereby, violated
 the terms of the Agreement executed between them.

A copy of the Legal notice dated 14.06.2018 is annexed herein as

Annexure- C/5

23. That the claimant requested the respondent many times over phone,
E-mails, Letters and by meeting them personally and sought
information on the status of the project and also the probable
time/date of handling over possession but no effective response came
from the Respondent. It is pertinent to note that after few days, the
Claimant on visiting the project site was shocked to see that there was
absolutely no construction going on in the site and the Respondent
would not be able to handover the possession of the unit anytime
soon.

24. It is submitted that all the concerns and grievances raised by the
Claimant fell on the deaf ears of the Respondent. The Respondent
being in a dominant position has arbitrarily extracted monies from the
claimant in the name of investing the same in development work of
the project, however, the Respondent diverted the hard earned money
of the Claimant and misused the same for his own use and purpose.

Latest photographs of the site are annexed herewith as Annexure

C/6.

25. That on 29.07.2019 as a last resort, the Claimant also filed a Police
complaint against the Respondent in Sector-31 Police Station for their
misconducts. Thereafter, as it was a prima facie case, the Police
authorities had lodged the FIR against them and a chargesheet has
already been filed in the court against their criminal liability.
A copy of the FIR is annexed herein with as Annexure-C/7

26. That the Claimant has not been compensated with even a penny till
date by the Respondent for the delay in delivery. Thus, the
Respondent Company has resorted to unfair practices by way of
 making incorrect, false and misleading clauses in the BBA.
27. That the Respondent failed to complete the project and substantially
failed to discharge its obligations. Therefore, the Claimant intends to
withdraw from the project owing to unreasonable delay in completion
of the project and hence the Respondent is liable to return the amount
deposited by the Claimant along with an interest.
28. That inordinate delay in handing over possession of the unit clearly
amounts to deficiency of service on account of the Respondent
Company and the Claimant have rightly claimed to withdraw from the
project and claim total refund of amount along with the interest. That
in view of the above facts the Learned Authority is requested to direct
the Respondent to refund the money of the Claimant as they have
been subjected to mental and financial harassment by the Respondent
by illegally demanding money when the project is nowhere near
completion. It is also pertinent to mention here that the construction
work of the project is way behind than its schedule and there is no
hope for completion of the same in near future, and it is submitted that
the Claimant cannot be expected to endlessly wait for the possession.
This Principle has been settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
matter of Fortune Infrastructure and Ors. Vs. Trevor D’Lima and
Ors. (Judgment dated March 12, 2018). The Hon’ble Apex Court in
the abovementioned matter has held that

“15. Moreover, a person cannot be made to wait

indefinitely for the possession of the flats allotted to them
and they are entitled to seek the refund of the amount
paid by them, along with the compensation.”

29. That the Respondent has substantially failed to discharge its

obligations imposed upon them as per the BBA, the Respondent also
failed to refund the amounts paid by the Claimant along with interest.
Hence, the present Claim.

7. Details of NOT APPLICABLE

 any mutual
credit,
mutual
debts, or
other
mutual
dealings
between the
corporate
debtor and
the creditor
which may
be set-off
against the
claim
8. Details of NOT APPLICABLE
any security
held, the
value of the
security,
and the date
it was given
9. Details of Indian Bank
the bank
Account No.: 427181083
account to
which the IFSC: IDIB000N604
amount of
the claim or
any part
thereof can
be
transferred
pursuant to
a resolution
plan
1 List of 1. Payment Receipts issued by SRS Real Estate Ltd.
0. documents 2. Security Receipt of Rs. 57, 81,000/-
attached to 3. A BBA/ Allotment Letter dated 11.12.2015.
this claim in 4. Allotment Letter
order to 5. A copy of SMS or message chat
prove the 6. Reminder Letter Dated 05.06.2018
7. Legal Notice Dated 14.06.2018
existence
8. Latest Pictures of the Project
and non-
Complaint filed at Police station, Faridabad
payment of
 claim due
1 Name of the Shyam Arora
1. insolvency
Reg. No.: IBBI/IPA-02/IP-N00546/2017-18/11703
professional
who will act Email: arora.shyaam@yahoo.com
as the
Authorized
representati
ve of
creditors of
the class

Signature of financial creditor or person authorised to act on its behalf

[Please enclose the authority if this is being submitted on behalf of the financial creditor]

PritiGera, W/o Krishan Lal Gera

FINANCIAL CREDITOR

C-572, Sector 15A, Faridabad, 121007

DECLARATION
I, PritiGera, W/o Krishan Lal Gera currently residing at C-572, Sector 15A, Faridabad,
121007, do hereby declare and state as follows: -

1. SRS Real Infrastructure Ltd., the corporate debtor was, at the insolvency
commencement date, being the……………..day of…………..20……., actually
indebted to me for a sum of Rs. 27,27,500/-.

2. In respect of my claim of the said sum or any part thereof, I have relied on the
documents specified below:

i. Payment Receipts issued by SRS Real Infrastructure Ltd.

ii. Lease Deed dated 16.03.2016 for Unit bearing No. 451
admeasuring 990.19 sq. ft. in the project “SRS Emerald Court”,
district Faridabad.
iii. An acknowledgment letter dated 01.04.2016 for full and final
payment towards the said unit issued by SRS Real Infrastructure
Ltd.
iv. Legal Notice dated 07.01.2018
 v. Claim filed at Police station, Faridabad
vi. Attachment order dated 08.01.2020 passed by Directorate of
Enforcement under second proviso of Sub Section (1) of Section
vii. A copy of SMS or message chats

3. The said documents are true, valid and genuine to the best of my knowledge,
information and belief and no material facts have been concealed therefrom.
4. In respect of the said sum or any part thereof, neither I, nor any person, by my
order, to my knowledge or belief, for my use, had or received any manner of
satisfaction or security whatsoever, save and except the following:
5. I am a related party of the corporate debtor, as defined under section 5 (24) of the
Code.
6. I am eligible to give voting instruction to the authorized representative by virtue
of proviso to section 21 (2) of the Code even though I am a related party of the
corporate debtor.

Date:
Place:

(Signature of the claimant)

PritiGera

VERIFICATION
I, PritiGera, the claimant hereinabove, do hereby verify that the contents of this proof of
claim are true and correct to my knowledge and belief and no material fact has been
concealed therefrom.

Verified at … on this …… day of ………., 20…

(Signature of claimant)
PritiGera