Appeal No. 148 of 2021
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal issued the order in Appeal No. 148 of 2021 on 21 January 2022, dismissing M/s. Sameeraa Foundation Private Limited's appeal because the required full deposit was not made. The tribunal also refused more time for payment and closed the connected miscellaneous applications.
What the case concerned
Appeal No. 148 of 2021 arose from a complaint by A. Prashanth and Karthiga against M/s. Sameeraa Foundation Private Limited and M/s. BBCL Properties Private Limited. The complaint sought refund of the sale consideration with interest and compensation.
The Adjudicating Officer had partly allowed the complaint on 11 March 2021. M/s. Sameeraa Foundation Private Limited appealed against that decision before the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal.
Amounts awarded by the Adjudicating Officer
The Adjudicating Officer directed the promoter to pay:
- Refund of the sale consideration of Rs.19,68,363.
- Interest at 10.05 per cent per year under Rule 18 of the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority Rules.
- Rs.25,550 for registration charges and stamp duty.
- Rs.2,00,000 as compensation for mental agony and hardship.
- Rs.25,000 for litigation costs.
Deposit required for the appeal
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal considered the appeal under Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. On 5 January 2022, it required the entire amount ordered by the Adjudicating Officer to be deposited by 20 January 2022.
The tribunal recorded that M/s. Sameeraa Foundation Private Limited and the appellant in Appeal No. 132 of 2021 were jointly and severally responsible for the deposit. This meant that the amount could be deposited by either party or through their combined compliance.
Why the appeal was dismissed
M/s. Sameeraa Foundation Private Limited filed M.A. No. 15 of 2022 seeking more time to make the deposit. Neither it nor the appellant in Appeal No. 132 of 2021 deposited the required amount within the time granted.
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal refused an extension because sufficient time had already been given and because it treated payment under Section 43(5) as mandatory. It dismissed M.A. No. 15 of 2022 and consequently dismissed Appeal No. 148 of 2021 for failure to comply with the deposit requirement. The connected miscellaneous applications were also closed.
Who is affected
Appeal No. 148 of 2021 directly affects the two complainants, M/s. Sameeraa Foundation Private Limited and M/s. BBCL Properties Private Limited. For other property buyers and promoters, the decision shows that failure to make a deposit required for admission of an appeal can result in dismissal without the appeal proceeding further.
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 buyers receive a refund award?
Yes. The Adjudicating Officer directed refund of Rs.19,68,363 with interest at 10.05 per cent per year, along with specified charges, compensation and litigation costs.
Why did the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal dismiss the appeal?
The appeal was dismissed because the entire amount required under Section 43(5) was not deposited within the time granted.
Did the tribunal allow more time to make the deposit?
No. The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal dismissed M.A. No. 15 of 2022, finding that sufficient time had already been provided.
Could either promoter have made the required deposit?
Yes. The tribunal recorded that the appellants in Appeal No. 132 of 2021 and Appeal No. 148 of 2021 were jointly and severally liable, and that either could deposit the amount.
