S.R.No.484 of 2019 in Unnumbered Appeal of 2019
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, Andaman and Nicobar Island), in S.R. No. 484 of 2019 in Unnumbered Appeal of 2019 dated 28 August 2019, rejected an appeal filed by M/s. Asvini Foundations at the maintainability stage because the appellant and her counsel repeatedly failed to appear. The Tribunal awarded no costs and did not record a substantive decision on the underlying dispute.
What the proceeding concerned
S.R. No. 484 of 2019 in Unnumbered Appeal of 2019 concerned an appeal by M/s. Asvini Foundations, represented by its partner Ms. Aarti Razee. The appeal was filed through M/s. T.M. Naidu and Company under Section 44(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
The appellant asked the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal to set aside the Adjudicating Officer's order in S.R. No. 0152 of 2019 dated 2 May 2019 and to pass any further appropriate orders.
Who is affected
S.R. No. 484 of 2019 directly affects M/s. Asvini Foundations and the 17 listed respondents. The respondents included individual parties, M/s. ICMC Corporation Limited and the Akila Heights Owners Association, represented by its President.
The Tribunal recorded that civil suit and arbitration proceedings were already pending. Notice was therefore ordered to the respondents for the limited purpose of examining whether the appeal was maintainable.
Key procedural history
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal recorded the following events:
- On 18 July 2019, the appellant's advocate was heard on maintainability, and notice was ordered to the respondents.
- On 29 July 2019, counsel entered appearance for respondents 1, 3 and 17. Respondents' counsel also reported that the seventh respondent, Mr. R. Shanmugam, had died long ago.
- On 8 August 2019, counsel entered appearance for respondents 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 14.
- The case was adjourned at the appellant's request to 19 August 2019 and then to 20 August 2019.
- On 20 August 2019, the appellant and counsel were absent. The Tribunal gave another opportunity and warned that continued nonappearance would lead to the matter being posted for dismissal.
- On 26 August 2019, the appellant and counsel were again absent, and the case was posted under the caption “for dismissal” for 28 August 2019.
Outcome and practical effect
On 28 August 2019, the appellant and her counsel were absent again, while the first respondent was present. The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal rejected the appeal at the maintainability stage for default because of the repeated failure to appear. No costs were awarded.
The decision records a procedural rejection of this particular appeal. It does not set out a substantive ruling on the underlying property dispute or the merits of the Adjudicating Officer's order.
This summary is generated from the source document to help you find what is relevant. The PDF above is authoritative. For advice on your own property, use LandLens One or speak to a qualified professional.
Common questions
Why was M/s. Asvini Foundations' appeal rejected?
The appellant and her counsel repeatedly failed to appear despite adjournments and a warning that the matter would be posted for dismissal. The Tribunal therefore rejected the appeal at the maintainability stage for default.
Did the Tribunal decide the merits of the property dispute?
No substantive decision on the underlying dispute is recorded. The appeal was rejected for default at the maintainability stage.
What order was M/s. Asvini Foundations trying to challenge?
The appellant sought to set aside the Adjudicating Officer's order in S.R. No. 0152 of 2019 dated 2 May 2019.
Did the Tribunal order either side to pay costs?
No. The Tribunal expressly stated that there would be no costs.
