Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2020 Supreme(Mad) 9

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Kirubakaran, P. Velmurugan, JJ.
M/s. Adinath Srinivasa Foundations LLP, Rep. by Managing Partner, Chennai - Appellant
Versus
The Secretary, Serene Kshetra Owners Association, Rep. by its Secretary Shekar Murthy - Respondent
C.M.A. No. 2287 of 2019 & C.M.P. No. 10042 of 2019
Decided On : 03-02-2020

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :P. Wilson, Senior Counsel for M/s. Richardson Wilson, Advocate. For the Respondent:Ralph V. Manohar, Advocate.

The judgment establishes the requirement for separate registration for each phase of a real estate project and emphasizes the need for compliance with the exemption criteria for completed projects under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.

Headnote:
Real Estate - Development Project - Tamil Nadu Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 - Rule 2(h)(iii), Section 3(2) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - The court discussed the interpretation and application of Rule 2(h)(iii) and Section 3(2) of the Act, focusing on the definition of ongoing projects, the requirement for separate registration for each phase of a project, and the exemption criteria for completed projects.
Fact of the Case:

The appellant, a developer, sought exemption from registering the 'Serene Kshetra' project under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, claiming it as a structurally completed project. The respondent association contended that the project was ongoing and should be registered.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the project was not structurally completed as claimed by the appellant and should be registered under the Act. It rejected the appellant's argument of two separate projects and emphasized the requirement for separate registration for each phase of a project.
Issues: Interpretation of Rule 2(h)(iii) and Section 3(2) of the Act, determination of ongoing project status, and the applicability of exemption criteria for completed projects.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the project was not structurally completed, rejected the appellant's claim of two separate projects, and emphasized the requirement for separate registration for each phase of a project.
Final Decision: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was directed to register the 'Serene Kshetra' under the RERA Act within one month from the date of the judgment.

JUDGMENT :

P. Velmurugan, J.

Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed Under Clause 58 of the Provision of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, against the order passed by the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal for Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, Andaman and Nicobar Islands dated 11.01.2019 in Appeal No.5 of 2018.

1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the order passed by the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (TNREAT) for Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, Andaman and Nicobar Islands dated 11.01.2019 in Appeal No.5 of 2018.

2. The appellant is in the field of development and construction of housing and commercial properties. The appellant wanted to develop a Housing project for the benefit of senior citizens. Accordingly, the appellant identified land in Kancheepuram District. The appellant entered into an agreement of sale with the owner of the land for a total extent of 13.20 acres and a Memorandum of Understanding dated 21.03.2013 with M/s. Serene Senior Living Private Limited to develop an integrated residential project for senior citizens termed as ‘Serene Kshetra’. The project consisted of 175 units - 99 Row houses, 15 Villas, 40 Twin Houses and 21 Studio Villas.

3. The owner of the land was requested by the appellant to obtain necessary approval and accordingly DTCP approval was also obtained. Subsequently, the Local Planning Authority also gave planning permission for the building on 09.06.2014 and as per the approval, required Gift Deeds were executed gifting land to the local authority for forming roads, OSR etc. Subsequently, the agreement of sale was cancelled. The appellant had entered into a Joint Venture Agreement dated 11.06.2015 with the land owner.

4. Subsequently, the Real Estate [Regulation and Development] Act, 2016, (hereinafter called as “Act”) came into force on 05.05.2016. The appellant states that as per Rule 2(h)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, an ongoing project is defined as a project where construction is structurally completed in so far as cases outside Chennai Metropolitan Area and such projects shall be intimated to the concerned Local Planning Authority or Regional Deputy Director of the Town and Country Planning Department within 15 days from the date of notification of the Rules with a copy marked to the office of the Director of Town and Country Planning and as such, they are exempted from Registration under the Act. As per the Tamil Nadu Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, the Authority viz., Director of Town and Country Planning will have to publish the list of all such ongoing projects in the official website, on the 16th day of notification of the rules besides publication of the same in the website of Real Estate Regulatory Authority.

5. According to the appellant, the subject matter of the project viz., “Serene kshetra” is a structurally completed project and as such it is not an ongoing project. The Authority has also issued a certificate and exempted the said project from registration, by publishing the list of structurally completed projects under Rule 2(h)(iii) of the Rules and accordingly, it was uploaded in the official website of Town and Country Planning Department.

6. The respondent Association preferred a complaint to the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority, praying to direct the appellant to register “Serene Kshetra” project under the Tamil Nadu Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 (hereinafter called as “Rules”) stating that “Serene Kshetra” is an ongoing project and there are two phases in the project and therefore, when the project has not been completed, the project could be called as an ongoing project. Therefore, the said project has not been completed and it cannot be exempted under Rule 2 (h)(iii) of the Rules.

7. The Regulatory Authority, after issuing notice to the parties, directed the Commissioner, Town and Country Planning, to inspect the project and submit a report. Based on the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis