case law

Miscellaneous Application No. 93 of 2020 in Appeal No. 52 of 2020

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, covering Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, issued the order in Miscellaneous Application No. 93 of 2020 in Appeal No. 52 of 2020 on 29 October 2020. It temporarily stayed the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority's direction requiring the promoters to register their project, while leaving that issue to be decided in the pending appeal.

Category
Tribunal and court orders
Effective
1 January 2020
Pages
3
Status
In force
Open the source document The official copy, as published. Opens in a new tab.
Source document Preview loads as you scroll

What the proceeding concerns

Miscellaneous Application No. 93 of 2020 arose from a dispute between homebuyers Mrs. Bhoomijha Murali and Mr. K.V. Murali, and promoters Evita Constructions Private Limited and Lucifer Constructions Private Limited. The buyers had agreed to purchase an undivided share of 314 square feet of land and a residential flat measuring 1,992 square feet on the second floor of Tower 1, in the block named Chartwell, for Rs. 73,37,440.

The agreement provided for possession in January 2013. After the promoters failed to hand over possession as agreed, the buyers approached the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority seeking possession and conveyance of the undivided land share.

What had already been completed

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed the promoters to hand over the flat and execute the sale deed on or before 30 September 2020. The promoters appealed and sought a stay.

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal records that:

  • The promoters expressed willingness to hand over the flat during the appeal proceedings.
  • The Tribunal directed them to deliver possession on or before 28 October 2020.
  • The homebuyers confirmed that they received possession and the key.
  • The promoters stated that the sale deeds and delivery of possession had been completed on 20 October 2020.

Decision on project registration

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority had also directed registration of the promoters' project on or before 30 October 2020. The promoters argued that the project had been completed before the Real Estate Regulatory Authority rules came into force and that project registration could not be required until the appeal decided that question.

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal found that project registration was the only remaining issue in the appeal. It allowed the stay application only to a limited extent and stayed the project registration part of the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority's order in C.No.479 of 2019, dated 3 September 2020, until Appeal No. 52 of 2020 is disposed of. No costs were awarded.

Who is affected

Miscellaneous Application No. 93 of 2020 directly concerns the named promoters and homebuyers. It does not finally decide whether the project must be registered. That question remains pending in Appeal No. 52 of 2020.

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 homebuyers receive possession of the flat?

Yes. The homebuyers filed a memo confirming that the promoters handed over the flat and that they received possession with the key.

Was the requirement to register the project cancelled?

No. The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal stayed the project registration direction only until Appeal No. 52 of 2020 is disposed of.

Did the stay cover the sale deed and delivery of possession?

No. The limited stay concerned project registration. The Tribunal recorded that the conveyance deed and possession requirements had already been complied with.

Why did the promoters challenge the project registration direction?

The promoters argued that the project had been completed before the Real Estate Regulatory Authority rules came into force and asked for that issue to be decided in the appeal.