Appeal No.68 of 2023 and M.A.No.205 of 2023

What the case concerns

Appeal No.68 of 2023 and M.A.No.205 of 2023 concerns apartment No.42 in Block-C of the Jagannath Orchid project and its associated covered car park, No.E-25. M. Gokulnath purchased the apartment from the original allottee, P.S. Rajeswar, through a sale deed dated 25 October 2021.

The original allotment letter and allotment sheet showed that car park No.E-25 had been allotted to P.S. Rajeswar with the apartment. The promoter also admitted in its appeal memorandum that M. Gokulnath purchased the apartment along with one car park.

What the promoter argued

M/s. Padmavathi Realty and Promoters Private Limited challenged the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority order dated 20 July 2023. Its main arguments included:

• The project had been completed and the apartment and promised amenities had been handed over to the original allottee.
• Maintenance of the apartment complex, including car parking areas, had been handed over to the Apartment Welfare Association in 2012.
• The promoter no longer had responsibility for the apartment.
• The complaint was barred by limitation.
• M. Gokulnath had not been properly represented before the Regulatory Authority because his representative was neither a chartered accountant nor a legal practitioner and had no power of attorney.

Tribunal findings

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal found that M. Gokulnath had stepped into the position of the original allottee after purchasing the apartment along with the car park. Based on the allotment documents and the promoter's admission, the Tribunal held that he was entitled to car park No.E-25.

The Tribunal also found that engaging a chartered accountant or legal practitioner for representation before the Regulatory Authority was not mandatory. Allowing a close relative to represent the complainant without a valid power of attorney was treated as a procedural irregularity that did not affect the merits of the dispute.

Result and practical relevance

The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal dismissed the promoter's appeal at the admission stage and closed the connected miscellaneous application. The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority direction requiring possession of car park No.E-25 to be handed over to M. Gokulnath therefore remained undisturbed.

The decision directly affects the promoter and purchaser in this dispute. It is also relevant to subsequent apartment purchasers whose sale and earlier allotment records identify a specific car parking space.