Appeal (SR) No.149 of 2024
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal issued its order in Appeal (SR) No.149 of 2024 on 26 April 2024. It records that a promoter's appeal cannot be entertained without the mandatory pre-deposit and rejects the promoter's unsupported claim that it had not collected a Corpus Fund from villa owners.
What the appeal concerns
Appeal (SR) No.149 of 2024 was filed by M/s. Bahri Estates Private Limited and M/s. Bahri Realty Management Services Private Limited against Anandam Villa Owners Welfare Society. The promoter and service provider challenged the TNRERA order in C.No.26 of 2022, dated 29 January 2024, and asked for the complaint to be dismissed.
The welfare society had sought promised facilities and amenities, transfer of common amenities and infrastructure, and payment of the Corpus Fund and other interest free money collected from its members into the association's account.
TNRERA directed the promoter to transfer the Corpus Fund and other interest free money related to maintenance of common areas to the association on or before 31 March 2024. TNRERA also imposed a penalty of Rs.10 lakhs for contravention of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
Pre-deposit requirement
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal Registry questioned whether Appeal (SR) No.149 of 2024 could be maintained because the appellants had not deposited the Corpus Fund directed by TNRERA.
Key findings recorded by the Tribunal were:
- A promoter's appeal cannot be entertained without pre-deposit of the entire amount awarded by TNRERA and at least 30 per cent of the penalty.
- The appellants deposited Rs.3 lakhs, representing 30 per cent of the Rs.10 lakh penalty.
- The Tribunal treated the penalty pre-deposit requirement as complied with.
- The promoter argued that no Corpus Fund had been collected and therefore no corresponding pre-deposit was required.
- The welfare society's complaint specifically alleged collection of deposits towards the Corpus Fund, Club House and Golf Course.
- The appellants had not denied the Corpus Fund allegation in their counter before TNRERA.
- The Tribunal declined to accept a submission that was not supported by pleadings.
The Tribunal relied on Newtech Promoters & Developers Private Limited versus State of Uttar Pradesh and others, where the Supreme Court held that the pre-deposit requirement is mandatory before a promoter's appeal can be entertained.
Who may be affected
Appeal (SR) No.149 of 2024 is relevant to promoters appealing against TNRERA directions involving penalties or money payable to allottees. It is also relevant to associations of allottees seeking transfer of corpus or maintenance related funds. The supplied text does not include a final operative direction disposing of the appeal.
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 promoter make the required penalty deposit?
Yes. The promoter deposited Rs.3 lakhs, which was 30 per cent of the Rs.10 lakh penalty, and the Tribunal recorded compliance for the penalty portion.
Why was the appeal's maintainability questioned?
The Registry raised the issue because the appellants had not deposited the Corpus Fund that TNRERA had directed the promoter to transfer to the welfare society.
Did the Tribunal accept the claim that no Corpus Fund was collected?
No. The welfare society had specifically alleged collection of the Corpus Fund, while the appellants had not denied that allegation in their counter. The Tribunal declined to consider the later unsupported submission.
Does the supplied text say whether the appeal was finally allowed or dismissed?
No. The supplied text records the pre-deposit issue and the Tribunal's reasoning, but it does not include a final operative direction allowing or dismissing the appeal.
