Case law, Tamil Nadu land law
Common Order, Appeal Nos. 6, 8, 9 to 12 of 2019
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal issued the Common Order in Appeal Numbers 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of 2019 on 6 November 2019, recording Pacifica (Chennai Project) Infrastructure Private Limited's withdrawal of its appeals against a project registration direction. The Tribunal dismissed all six appeals as withdrawn without costs and allowed the allottees to approach the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority about partial registration or enforcement of its direction.
What the case concerned
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal considered six appeals filed by Pacifica (Chennai Project) Infrastructure Private Limited against allottees of the project. The allottees had complained to the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority that they had paid 80 per cent of the total cost, but construction was incomplete and the flats were not fit for occupation.
The allottees said the promoter had promised to hand over the flats by June 2015, with a six month grace period ending in December 2015. They asked for project registration and delivery of their flats.
Project registration dispute
The promoter argued that the project had been structurally completed before implementation of the Tamil Nadu real estate regulatory system and was exempt from registration. After inspection and consideration, the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority found that the project was ongoing and directed its registration.
The promoter appealed against that finding. During the appeals, it applied to register Auram Villa Pride Tower Blocks A1 and B1 at Pudupakkam and then asked to withdraw the appeals.
The responding allottees objected because:
- The registration application did not include Block D.
- They said the regulatory direction covered the entire Phase I and Phase II of the Pride Tower Project.
- They asked the Tribunal to monitor registration of the entire project.
- They sought costs for the time and expense caused by the appeals.
Tribunal's decision
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal held that it could not compel the promoter to continue appeals that the promoter wished to withdraw. It also found that monitoring project registration was outside the Tribunal's role, which was to examine the legality of orders made by the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority.
The Tribunal recorded the withdrawal memos and dismissed Appeal Numbers 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of 2019 as withdrawn. No costs were awarded.
Effect on buyers
The Common Order dated 6 November 2019 did not prevent the allottees from pursuing enforcement. It stated that they could apply for execution and approach the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority regarding partial registration and compliance with the regulatory direction, including by using the remedy under Section 63 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016.
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 Tribunal decide that the project was exempt from registration?
No. The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority had found that the project was ongoing and directed registration. The promoter withdrew its appeals against that finding.
Were the promoter's appeals allowed?
No. Appeal Numbers 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of 2019 were dismissed as withdrawn after the promoter filed withdrawal memos.
Can buyers complain that only Blocks A1 and B1 were submitted for registration?
Yes. The Tribunal gave the respondents liberty to approach the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority about partial registration and compliance with its direction.
Did the Tribunal award legal costs to the allottees?
No. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as withdrawn without costs.
