Supertech Limited used to be a big name in the Indian real estate business, but in the last few years it has been going through a lot of legal and financial trouble. The company was having financial problems because it had many ongoing projects that were depending on thousands of homebuyers. This caused India's insolvency law framework to start the insolvency proceedings. The matter reached the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and later the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), making it a crucial case study in corporate insolvency jurisprudence. This article aims to explain the Supertech insolvency NCLT ruling and issue in simple terms while also presenting a detailed legal viewpoint.
Unlock new career opportunities with The Legal School’s Certification in Bankruptcy & Insolvency Law: Corporate Restructuring & Debt Resolution, in collaboration with IndusLaw. This six-month program, led by industry experts, equips you with critical skills in insolvency litigation, financial distress management, and corporate rescue strategies. Earn a prestigious certificate and elevate your expertise in a rapidly evolving field!
What Led to Supertech Insolvency?
In March 2022, the NCLT’s Delhi Bench admitted a plea filed by Union Bank of India against Supertech Ltd. under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The bank claimed a default of over ₹432 crore related to the Eco Village II project in Greater Noida. The tribunal found the default valid and initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Supertech Ltd.
Under the IBC, once a company is admitted into CIRP, the control shifts from the company's board to an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). In Supertech’s case, Hitesh Goyal was appointed as the IRP. His role was to take charge of the company’s assets, manage operations and invite resolution plans from potential buyers or investors.
Role of NCLT in Supertech Insolvency
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has played a central and multi-faceted role in the insolvency of Supertech Limited. Its involvement has legal, procedural, and practical implications under India’s Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). Below is a detailed explanation of the role of NCLT in the Supertech insolvency case, suitable for academic, professional, or informative use.
1. Admission of Insolvency: The NCLT (Delhi Bench) admitted the insolvency petition filed by Union Bank of India in March 2022 for a default of ₹432 crore related to Supertech’s Eco Village II project, under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016.
2. Appointment of IRP: NCLT appointed an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) to take over the management, safeguard assets, form the Committee of Creditors (CoC), and oversee the resolution process.
3. Approval of Project-Wise Resolution: NCLT allowed a “project-wise resolution” approach, treating each Supertech project as a separate entity under insolvency. This safeguarded the interests of homebuyers and lenders by preventing delays and ensuring project completion.
4. Stakeholder Protection: It ensured fair treatment of homebuyers (as financial creditors), banks, vendors, and employees by supervising all actions of the IRP and balancing stakeholder interests.
5. Legal Precedent: NCLT’s handling of the Supertech case set a legal precedent for real estate insolvency by tailoring IBC processes to suit sector-specific complexities.
In essence, NCLT played a pivotal role as the adjudicator, supervisor, and protector of stakeholder rights during Supertech’s corporate insolvency.
Understanding the Project-Wise Resolution Approach
Traditionally, insolvency proceedings would involve the entire corporate entity. However, Supertech had dozens of ongoing projects, each at different stages of development and financing. A single-company-wide insolvency would have created confusion and delayed justice for many homebuyers and creditors.
Recognizing this complexity, the NCLAT, and later the Supreme Court, endorsed a "project-wise insolvency resolution" model. This means that each housing project developed by Supertech is treated as a distinct unit under insolvency. The resolution plans and financial restructuring are handled separately for each project.
Legal Significance
This move is legally important because:
It acknowledges the unique nature of real estate development.
It prevents one failing project from dragging down the entire group.
It ensures homebuyers' rights under IBC (as financial creditors) are protected by isolating the assets and cash flows of each project.
This project-wise resolution model was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2023, establishing it as a precedent in future real estate insolvency cases.
Other Group Entities Under Insolvency
Following the insolvency of the parent company, several subsidiaries of Supertech also came under the lens of the NCLT:
Supertech Realtors (developer of the Supernova project in Noida) faced insolvency in June 2024, due to a default of ₹168 crore to Bank of Maharashtra.
Supertech Township Projects Ltd. (developer of Golf Country in Greater Noida) entered insolvency in July 2024, after defaulting on a ₹216 crore loan from Punjab & Sind Bank.
These actions show the depth of the financial crisis within the Supertech Group.
Impact on Homebuyers and Creditors
Homebuyers awaiting possession and creditors looking for loan recovery are both very concerned about Supertech's insolvency. In this section, we look at how each group is affected and what protections the legal system offers.
Homebuyers
Under the IBC, following the 2018 amendment, homebuyers are considered "financial creditors." This gives them representation in the Committee of Creditors (CoC), which approves or rejects resolution plans.
In Supertech’s case:
Many homebuyers feared losing both their homes and their money.
The IRPs had to work with project consultants, ex-employees, and construction agencies to keep building activities going.
Courts emphasized that insolvency shouldn’t mean abandoning buyers’ interests.
Financial Institutions
Banks like Union Bank of India and Punjab & Sind Bank, being secured creditors, have a high stake in the resolution process. They are part of the CoC and have voting powers in decision-making.
Legal Takeaways and Challenges
The Supertech case has introduced new precedents and exposed gaps in the insolvency process, especially in the real estate sector. This section outlines key legal insights and practical challenges emerging from the ongoing resolution efforts.
Legal Precedents Set
The project-wise resolution approved in Supertech’s case now serves as a model for other real estate insolvency matters.
It supports the idea that each project is a separate asset with independent obligations, aligning with the principle of fairness and efficient resolution under the IBC.
Challenges
Project-wise insolvency increases the administrative burden on IRPs.
It requires extensive coordination with local authorities, homebuyers' associations, and financial institutions.
Fragmentation of resolution processes may delay overall recovery.
Final Thoughts
The Supertech insolvency case marks a turning point in India’s real estate and insolvency laws. It showcases how legal interpretation and judicial innovation—like the project-wise resolution model—can protect stakeholders while upholding the spirit of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
For homebuyers, it offers hope that their investments are not automatically doomed in case of developer insolvency. For lenders and developers, it signals the importance of project-level financial management and transparency. As the process continues, it will serve as a benchmark for how India handles complex real estate insolvencies going forward.
Related Posts:
Supertech Insolvency NCLT: FAQs
Q1. Why did Supertech go into insolvency?
Supertech defaulted on loans exceeding ₹400 crore, leading Union Bank of India to file an insolvency petition with the NCLT.
Q2. What is the NCLT's role in the Supertech case?
The NCLT admitted Supertech under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and appointed an Interim Resolution Professional to manage the process.
Q3. What is a project-wise insolvency resolution?
This approach treats each real estate project as a separate unit for insolvency, protecting homebuyers' interests and enabling project completion.
Q4. Are homebuyers protected in the Supertech insolvency?
Yes, under IBC, homebuyers are treated as financial creditors and can participate in the resolution process.
Q5. What happens to ongoing Supertech projects?
Projects continue under the supervision of the IRP and court-appointed mechanisms, aiming for completion despite insolvency.
