case law

Appeal No. 64 of 2021

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, Andaman and Nicobar Islands) issued its order in Appeal No. 64 of 2021 on 28 January 2022, allowing an appeal by M/s. Provident Housing Limited against a refund decision obtained by home buyer P. Rajasekhar. The Tribunal set aside the Adjudicating Officer's decision and sent the complaint to the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Chennai, for a fresh decision on refund and interest after hearing both parties.

Category
Tribunal and court orders
Effective
1 January 2021
Pages
5
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 case concerned

Appeal No. 64 of 2021 arose from a construction agreement between M/s. Provident Housing Limited and home buyer P. Rajasekhar. The promoter had agreed to hand over possession by 31 August 2016, with a six month grace period ending in February 2017.

The home buyer later sought relief before the Adjudicating Officer. The promoter did not appear in those proceedings, and the Adjudicating Officer decided the complaint using the home buyer's available records.

Why the appeal was allowed

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal found that the earlier decision did not discuss an email dated 24 June 2019, in which the promoter reportedly stated that the flat was ready for possession and demanded the balance amount and interest. The home buyer had referred to that email in his own legal notice but disputed the demand.

The Tribunal held that the Adjudicating Officer should have considered the merits of both sides and issued a reasoned decision, even though the promoter was absent. Omitting the promoter's position on readiness to hand over possession was found to be against the principles of natural justice.

Directions issued

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal made the following directions:

  • The Adjudicating Officer's decision in C.C.P. No. 50 of 2020, dated 29 October 2020, was set aside.
  • The home buyer's complaint was remanded for a fresh decision concerning refund and interest.
  • The Adjudicating Officer was directed to return the complaint to the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority.
  • The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority was directed to hear both parties and decide refund and interest on the merits under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
  • The promoter's pre-deposit, representing 40% of the total amount previously ordered, was to remain in a fixed deposit until the complaint was decided.
  • Both parties were directed to appear before the Adjudicating Officer on 10 February 2022.
  • The promoter was ordered to pay Rs.10,000 to the Chief Minister's Relief Fund (Covid) and produce the receipt.

Who is affected

Appeal No. 64 of 2021 directly affects M/s. Provident Housing Limited and P. Rajasekhar. It does not finally decide whether the home buyer is entitled to refund or interest. Those issues were sent to the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority for fresh consideration after giving both parties sufficient opportunity to present their cases.

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 home buyer lose the refund claim?

No final decision was made against the refund claim. The complaint was sent to the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority for a fresh decision on refund and interest after hearing both parties.

Why was the Adjudicating Officer's decision set aside?

The Adjudicating Officer did not discuss the promoter's email stating that the flat was ready for possession. The Tribunal found that both sides' contentions should have been considered in a reasoned decision, even though the promoter had remained absent.

What happens to the promoter's pre-deposit?

The promoter's pre-deposit, which was 40% of the total amount previously ordered, must remain in a fixed deposit until the complaint is disposed of.

Which authority must now decide the refund and interest?

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority must take the complaint on file, give both parties sufficient opportunity, and decide the refund and interest issues on their merits.