A.No.10/2022, M/s. Mars Sun Properties v. Dr. A. Ramalingam
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, delivered the order in A.No.10/2022 on 12 August 2022 in an appeal by M/s. Mars Sun Properties against a direction of the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority concerning completion and handover of a flat. The Tribunal found that the project registration exemption under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 did not prevent the Authority from considering the complaint because neither the complaint nor the Authority's direction concerned project registration.
What the appeal concerns
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, considered A.No.10/2022, filed by M/s. Mars Sun Properties against Dr. A. Ramalingam. The appeal challenged the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority's order in C.No.167 of 2021, dated 30 December 2021.
Dr. A. Ramalingam and another landowner had entered into a joint promotion arrangement with the builder for a property measuring 3,049 square feet at Arumbakkam, Chennai. The agreement required the builder to bear construction costs and complete construction within 12 months after obtaining the sanctioned plan.
Rights claimed by the landowner
An addendum provided for Dr. A. Ramalingam to purchase additional constructed area and an additional undivided share for Rs.26,50,000. According to the case recorded by the Tribunal:
- His total super built-up area became 1,764 square feet.
- His undivided share became 842 square feet.
- The sanctioned plan was obtained on 14 February 2014.
- He claimed that his flat had not been completed and sought possession of Flat F1 in AVR Vasantham, Arumbakkam, along with property receipts and documents.
Builder's objections
M/s. Mars Sun Properties argued that the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority lacked jurisdiction because the land measured less than 500 square metres and the project contained fewer than eight apartments. The builder also claimed that construction had been completed, that money remained payable for alterations, service tax and utility connections, and that a related consumer dispute appeal was pending.
Tribunal's finding recorded in the supplied text
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal held that the statutory thresholds relied on by the builder concern exemption from project registration. Dr. A. Ramalingam had not requested registration, and the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority had not directed registration. The Tribunal therefore found that this registration exemption did not answer the jurisdiction issue raised in the appeal.
The supplied text ends while the Tribunal is considering the pending consumer dispute proceedings. It does not contain the Tribunal's final decision on whether A.No.10/2022 was allowed or dismissed.
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
Does a project below 500 square metres automatically fall outside the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority's jurisdiction?
Not on the reasoning recorded in A.No.10/2022. The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal said the threshold relied on by the builder concerns exemption from project registration, while this complaint did not seek registration.
What had the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed the builder to do?
The Authority directed M/s. Mars Sun Properties to hand over the completed flat by 28 February 2022 and provide the original property documents to the allottees. Handover was subject to payment of specified actual expenses supported by receipts from the relevant authorities.
Did the landowner have another case pending?
Yes. The source records that a consumer complaint had been dismissed and that an appeal, F.A.No.29/2018, was pending before the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
Did the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal allow the builder's appeal?
The supplied text does not include the final result. It ends during the Tribunal's consideration of the issue involving the pending consumer dispute appeal.
