Appeal No. 04 of 2021, M/s. Ozone Projects Private Limited v. M/s. Brizozone Property Holding Pvt. Ltd.
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal issued the order in Appeal No. 04 of 2021 on 7 July 2021, recording a compromise between M/s. Ozone Projects Private Limited and M/s. Brizozone Property Holding Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal accepted the compromise, disposed of the appeal according to the compromise application and closed the connected miscellaneous applications.
What the case concerns
Appeal No. 04 of 2021 arose from a compensation complaint filed by M/s. Brizozone Property Holding Pvt. Ltd. against the promoter, M/s. Ozone Projects Private Limited. The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has jurisdiction for Tamil Nadu, Puducherry and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands under the Real Estate Regulation and Development Act 2016.
The Adjudicating Officer had partly allowed the original complaint on 6 March 2020. The promoter then filed the appeal.
Earlier compensation decision
The Adjudicating Officer had directed the promoter to provide the following relief:
- Compensation of Rs.15 per square foot, as provided in the agreement, for each month of delay until possession was handed over.
- Interest at 10 percent per year on the amount received by the promoter.
- Rs.1,00,000 for mental agony.
- Rs.25,000 for litigation expenses.
The promoter challenged that decision before the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal.
Settlement and disposal
Appeal No. 04 of 2021 was taken on file on 11 January 2021. The parties informed the Tribunal that settlement negotiations were taking place. On 7 July 2021, both sides filed a compromise application in M.A. No. 89 of 2021 under Order 23 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The Tribunal verified the parties and their advocates through video conferencing. Both parties confirmed that they understood and accepted the compromise terms, and the Tribunal recorded the compromise.
The Tribunal then:
- Accepted the compromise between the promoter and complainant.
- Disposed of the appeal according to the compromise application.
- Closed the connected miscellaneous applications.
Who is affected
The outcome directly affects M/s. Ozone Projects Private Limited and M/s. Brizozone Property Holding Pvt. Ltd. The document does not reproduce the detailed compromise terms, so it does not show whether the parties retained, reduced or otherwise changed the amounts awarded by the Adjudicating Officer. Other buyers should not treat the earlier compensation figures as a general rate automatically available in every delayed possession dispute.
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 Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal decide the compensation dispute on its merits?
No. The Tribunal recorded the compromise accepted by both parties and disposed of the appeal according to their compromise application.
What compensation had the Adjudicating Officer originally awarded?
The award included Rs.15 per square foot for each month of delay until possession, interest at 10 percent per year on the amount received by the promoter, Rs.1,00,000 for mental agony and Rs.25,000 for litigation expenses.
Does the order disclose the final amount payable after settlement?
No. The document says the appeal was disposed of according to the compromise application, but it does not reproduce the detailed settlement terms.
Were any connected applications left pending?
No. The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal closed the connected miscellaneous applications.
