Appeal No. 5 of 2019, Casa Grande Engineering Private Limited v. K. Ganesan and V. Mahalakshmi
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, Andaman and Nicobar Island) issued its order in Appeal No. 5 of 2019 on 15 October 2019, recording a promoter’s challenge to an Adjudicating Officer’s direction to refund money to two flat allottees with interest, compensation and costs. The supplied text sets out the parties’ claims concerning cancellation, construction progress and refund terms, but does not include the Tribunal’s final findings or the result of the appeal.
What the appeal covers
Appeal No. 5 of 2019 concerns a flat allotted by Casa Grande Engineering Private Limited to K. Ganesan and V. Mahalakshmi in the CG Bellissimo project. The allotment covered flat B-205, measuring 1,635 square feet, a covered car park and an undivided land share of 797 square feet.
The allottees stated that they paid a total of Rs.64,31,192 and entered into an agreement for sale of the undivided land share and a construction agreement. They later sought cancellation and refund, claiming that the land share had not been registered, foundation work had not started and the promoter proposed a revised completion date of November 2019.
Who is affected
Appeal No. 5 of 2019 directly affects Casa Grande Engineering Private Limited and the two allottees named in the case. The dispute may also be relevant to Tamil Nadu buyers and promoters dealing with cancellation before the contractual possession deadline, proposed changes to completion dates, refund deductions, interest and compensation.
Key claims and amounts
The proceedings record the following positions:
- The Adjudicating Officer directed refund of Rs.64,31,192 with interest at 10.70%, compensation at 9% per annum on that amount and costs of Rs.25,000.
- The allottees said possession had originally been promised by December 2018, with a three month grace period, and that they cancelled after losing confidence in the project.
- The promoter argued that the agreed construction period had not expired when the allottees cancelled on 22 February 2018.
- The promoter relied on a construction agreement providing 18 months for completion, with a three month grace period, subject to payment by the allottees.
- The promoter maintained that the revised agreement was only a proposal and was never executed.
- The promoter offered to repay Rs.49,81,642 after deducting Rs.14,49,550 as 10% cancellation charges and damages.
- The allottees maintained that the promoter had collected substantial sums without registering the undivided land share or commencing foundation work.
Result shown in the supplied text
The supplied extract from the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal records the background and arguments from both sides. It ends during the allottees’ submissions and does not show whether the Tribunal confirmed, changed or cancelled the Adjudicating Officer’s award.
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
Did the allottees ask to cancel the flat booking?
Yes. The allottees sent a cancellation request on 22 February 2018 and sought refund of Rs.64,31,192 with interest.
What had the Adjudicating Officer awarded before the appeal?
The Adjudicating Officer ordered refund of Rs.64,31,192 with interest at 10.70%, compensation at 9% per annum on that amount and costs of Rs.25,000.
Why did the promoter challenge the refund award?
The promoter argued that the construction deadline, including the grace period, had not expired when the allottees cancelled. It also claimed that cancellation was voluntary and that interest and compensation were therefore not payable.
Did the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal uphold the award?
The supplied text does not provide the Tribunal’s final findings or show whether the Adjudicating Officer’s award was upheld, changed or cancelled.
