Case law, Tamil Nadu land law
Common Order in Appeal No.16 of 2022 and Appeal No.72 of 2023
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, covering Tamil Nadu, Puducherry and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, delivered the common order in Appeal No.16 of 2022 and Appeal No.72 of 2023 on 22 November 2023. The appeals challenge the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority order dated 30 December 2021 concerning project registration, unfinished amenities, purchaser dues and disputed land rights at Rhythm Residency in Vadamugam Vellode Village, Erode District. The supplied extract does not contain the Tribunal's final operative directions.
What the appeals concern
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal considered two opposing appeals arising from the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority order in C.No.135 of 2021 dated 30 December 2021. Rhythm Residents Flat Owners Welfare Association filed Appeal No.16 of 2022, while M/s. Yes & Yes Premier Hi-tech Homes India Private Limited and A.K. Balasubramanian filed Appeal No.72 of 2023.
The dispute concerns Rhythm Residency at R.S.No.931/2/B2, Vadamugam Vellode Village, Erode District. The project land measures 14,837 square feet. The approved proposal was for 60 apartments in Blocks A and B, but the promoters constructed 48 apartments, with 24 apartments in each block.
Who is affected
The proceedings directly concern:
- Members of Rhythm Residents Flat Owners Welfare Association, who are allottees in Block A.
- M/s. Yes & Yes Premier Hi-tech Homes India Private Limited, the developer.
- A.K. Balasubramanian, the landowner and promoter.
- B. Radha, who received Block B, proportionate undivided land rights and adjoining land under the disputed transfer described in the proceedings.
Main issues raised
Rhythm Residents Flat Owners Welfare Association asked for completion of pending works and promised facilities, including a modern gym, community hall and children's park. It also challenged the transfer of land measuring 1,528 square feet where amenities were allegedly promised, together with undivided share rights.
The promoters argued that recreational facilities were to be provided only at additional cost. They said basic facilities, including drinking water, lifts, common lighting and parking, had already been provided. They also sought payment of outstanding sale consideration from purchasers with interest.
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority had directed registration of the development as an ongoing project and completion of pending amenities promised in the brochure and agreements. It also directed allottees to pay outstanding sale consideration, with interest calculated using the rate described in its order.
Disputed land transfer
The proceedings record that a civil suit challenging the transfer to B. Radha was pending before the Subordinate Court, Perundurai, Erode District. The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal allowed an application to receive the Settlement Deed dated 21 April 2016 as additional evidence. The source also separately refers in the appeal prayer to document No.1196 dated 21 April 2017, so the supplied text contains different dates for the disputed instrument.
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 this case apply to every flat owner in Tamil Nadu?
No. The proceedings concern Rhythm Residency in Vadamugam Vellode Village, Erode District, particularly the Block A allottees, the developer and the landowner.
Did the Tribunal cancel the transfer of the disputed land?
The supplied extract does not show a final direction cancelling the transfer. It records that a civil suit challenging the transfer was pending and that the Tribunal admitted the Settlement Deed dated 21 April 2016 as additional evidence.
Were the promoters required to complete the promised amenities?
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority had directed the promoter to complete pending amenities promised in the brochure and agreements. The promoters challenged that direction in Appeal No.72 of 2023, but the final appellate result is not included in the supplied extract.
Did flat purchasers still have to pay outstanding sale consideration?
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed allottees to pay the balance outstanding under their Memorandum of Agreement, with interest as described in that order. The promoters asked the Tribunal to require payment within a fixed time.
