NOIDA: The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has instructed that day-to-day maintenance of two Supertech housing projects—Ecociti (Sector 137) and 34 Pavilion (Sector 34)—be transferred to their registered apartment owners’ associations (AOAs) within 30 days. This decision empowers residents to manage essential services and maintenance through their elected representatives after enduring years of external management.
A bench led by chairperson Ashok Bhushan and member (technical) Barun Mitra directed YG Estates Facilities Management Pvt Ltd, the respondent, to complete the transfer under the supervision of the interim resolution professional (IRP), as Supertech Ltd is currently in insolvency proceedings.
In the case of Ecociti, the tribunal observed that the AOA was registered on January 3, 2022. The project comprises 2,147 flats, with 99% of owners now in possession and residing in the community.
The tribunal also emphasized the role of Noida Authority, noting that the applicant had communicated with the authority, which subsequently instructed Supertech Ltd to facilitate the maintenance handover to the registered association. The bench referenced a letter from the Authority dated June 1, 2022, which directed that maintenance be transferred to the association.
Addressing objections from YG Estates, the NCLAT reiterated its earlier ruling from March 18, 2025, concerning the Supernova AOA case, restating the legal obligation. The bench stated, “As the statute requires the promoter to relinquish facilities to the association, we conclude that YG Estates, being a related party to the corporate debtor and designated by the corporate debtor for maintenance, cannot refuse this transfer to the association.”
In approving the Ecociti application, the tribunal ordered, “Respondent No. 2 must complete the maintenance handover to the registered association within 30 days from today, supervised by the IRP.”
Regarding YG Estates’ claims of outstanding amounts from allottees, the bench clarified that this would not delay the handover. “The respondent No. 2 may pursue permissible actions concerning any dues under the contract with the allottees,” it stated.
In the 34 Pavilion case, the tribunal noted that occupancy certificates for two of the four residential towers were issued on September 28, 2012, with “not less than 99% of allottees having taken possession” across all four towers.
In this instance as well, the bench directed, “Respondent No. 2 must hand over maintenance within 30 days, supervised by the IRP.”
