Case law, Tamil Nadu land law
A.No. 3/2022, M/s. G.K.S. Technology Park Limited and another v. T. Aananthi
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal issued its order in A.No. 3/2022 on 2 March 2022 concerning an appeal by M/s. G.K.S. Technology Park Limited and its Chief Executive Officer against home buyer T. Aananthi. The Tribunal dismissed M.A.No.21/2022 because the appellants had not complied with its direction to pre-deposit 100% of the amount ordered by the Adjudicating Officer, and it closed the connected miscellaneous applications.
What the case concerned
A.No. 3/2022 before the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal arose from the Adjudicating Officer's order in C.C.P.No.212/2019 dated 30 November 2021. The appellants were M/s. G.K.S. Technology Park Limited, represented by its Managing Director K.V. Ramana Shetty, and its Chief Executive Officer, Suresh Vaidyanathan. The respondent was home buyer T. Aananthi.
The home buyer had sought compensation for delay and mental agony, refund of excess payment, compensation for rectification of defects, maintenance charges and litigation costs. The Adjudicating Officer partly allowed the complaint and directed the promoters to pay:
- Delay compensation with interest.
- Rs.5,00,000 for mental agony.
- Rs.50,000 for rectification of defects.
- Rs.22,867 as maintenance charges.
- Rs.25,000 as litigation costs.
What the Tribunal decided
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal had directed the appellants in M.A.No.21/2022 to pre-deposit 100% of the total amount ordered by the Adjudicating Officer. The direction was made under Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
The Tribunal recorded the following points on 2 March 2022:
- The last date for making the pre-deposit was 1 March 2022.
- Neither the appellants nor their counsel appeared when the matter was called.
- The required pre-deposit had not been made.
- No application seeking more time had been filed.
- No email requesting additional time had been sent.
Because of this non-compliance, the Tribunal dismissed M.A.No.21/2022, stating that compliance was mandatory for entertaining the appeal. It also closed the connected miscellaneous applications.
Who may be affected
The decision directly concerns M/s. G.K.S. Technology Park Limited, Suresh Vaidyanathan and T. Aananthi. It is also relevant to promoters considering an appeal against a real estate adjudication order because it shows that, in this case, failure to comply with a pre-deposit direction resulted in dismissal of the related application. Home buyers involved in an appeal may use the decision to understand how the Tribunal handled non-compliance with a pre-deposit direction.
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 Tribunal remove the compensation awarded to the home buyer?
No. The document records dismissal of M.A.No.21/2022 for failure to comply with the pre-deposit direction. It does not state that the Adjudicating Officer's compensation award was removed.
How much were the promoters required to pre-deposit?
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal directed them to pre-deposit 100% of the total amount ordered by the Adjudicating Officer.
Why was M.A.No.21/2022 dismissed?
The appellants did not make the required pre-deposit by 1 March 2022. The Tribunal also recorded that they had not sought an extension by application or email.
What compensation had the Adjudicating Officer awarded?
The award included delay compensation with interest, Rs.5,00,000 for mental agony, Rs.50,000 for rectification of defects, Rs.22,867 as maintenance charges and Rs.25,000 as litigation costs.
