Appeal No.42 of 2023 and M.A.Nos. 132 and 133 of 2023
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal issued its order in Appeal No.42 of 2023 and M.A.Nos. 132 and 133 of 2023 on 6 December 2023, concerning liability for the incomplete Renga's Greenlands project at Kalapatti Village, Coimbatore Taluk. The Tribunal dismissed the application to introduce an arbitration award and examined whether Mint Homes Private Limited had taken over construction management and development responsibilities, but the supplied text does not contain the final decision on the main appeal.
What the case concerns
Appeal No.42 of 2023 concerns an allottee in the Renga's Greenlands project at Kalapatti Village, Coimbatore Taluk. The allottee entered into a construction agreement with Sri Renga Property Developers Private Limited on 5 February 2008, and a sale deed for the undivided share of land was executed on 16 April 2008.
The construction cost was fixed at Rs.70,00,000, while the cost of the undivided share was Rs.4,86,750. The agreed date for handing over the apartment was 31 December 2008, but the project remained incomplete.
Why Mint Homes appealed
The Single Member of TNRERA treated Mint Homes Private Limited as a joint promoter. Mint Homes Private Limited and Sri Renga Property Developers Private Limited were directed, jointly and severally, to refund Rs.64,15,240 to the allottee with interest at 9.30 per cent per year from the respective payment dates until refund.
Mint Homes Private Limited challenged that liability, arguing that:
- It had no contract with the allottee and received no payment from him.
- It had not taken over the project or received an assignment of it.
- Its construction management and marketing agreement with the original promoter was never acted upon.
- Sri Renga Property Developers Private Limited, which received the allottee's money, should bear the refund liability.
Tribunal's consideration
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal recorded the following matters:
- Mint Homes Private Limited and the original promoter entered into a memorandum of understanding on 24 June 2009 covering three projects.
- Their agreement dated 21 July 2009 stated that Mint Homes Private Limited took over construction and marketing management from 1 July 2009.
- Mint Homes Private Limited agreed to procure construction materials.
- Mint Homes Private Limited wrote to the allottee on 25 July 2009 stating that it would be involved in construction management and marketing services for Green Lands, Green Woods and Cedars.
The Tribunal considered these terms evidence that Mint Homes Private Limited had been authorised to take responsibility for construction management and project development.
Additional evidence application
M.A.No.133 of 2023 sought permission to produce an arbitration award dated 17 December 2022. The Tribunal dismissed that application because the allottee was not a party to the arbitration and the award was not relevant to the appeal. The supplied text does not state the final result of Appeal No.42 of 2023 or M.A.No.132 of 2023.
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 decision affect every buyer in an unfinished Tamil Nadu project?
No. Appeal No.42 of 2023 concerns the specific Renga's Greenlands project at Kalapatti Village, Coimbatore Taluk, and the parties named in the proceedings.
What refund had the TNRERA Single Member ordered?
The Single Member directed Mint Homes Private Limited and Sri Renga Property Developers Private Limited, jointly and severally, to refund Rs.64,15,240 with interest at 9.30 per cent per year from the respective payment dates until refund.
Why did the Tribunal reject the arbitration award as additional evidence?
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal found that the allottee was not a party to the arbitration and that the award had no relevance to the appeal.
Did the Tribunal finally confirm that Mint Homes Private Limited must pay the refund?
The supplied text does not include the final decision on the main appeal. It records the arguments and findings about Mint Homes Private Limited's construction management role, and it dismisses M.A.No.133 of 2023.
